Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
The Blue Jays held their annual bash for season-ticket holders tonight at Alice Fazooli's. A lively crowd of more than 400 enjoyed the complimentary food and beverages, then a Q & A session, with Paul Godfrey and J.P. Ricciardi among the head table guests.

Speaking by telephone from Florida, Carlos Tosca said, "Our number one goal, our priority this year, is to get into the playoffs." The skipper believes it will take between 94 and 96 wins, and seems confident that he has the talent. "The biggest key for us to be able to do that is to stay healthy," he explained. "The one thing that we are unable to do that those other ball clubs can, is reload in the middle of the season. If we stay away from key injuries, I don't see any reason why we won't be in the pennant hunt. I will not be satisfied this year if we don't get into the playoffs."

Needless to say, that drew a large round of applause. So did the mere mention of Roy Halladay's new contract, and the return of Pat Hentgen to the fold. Asked about Doc's workload, Tosca cited his efficiency and mechanics and predicted he could throw 250+ innings "for many years to come."

J.P. warmed to the subject of Hentgen. "We didn't bring Pat here for a farewell tour. He pitched his butt off in the last half of the season, and we think he'll be a great addition to our club. We'll take advantage of those extra things, like his leadership, but he has a lot of baseball left in his arm, and he'll help our staff."

Nothing is carved in stone, and April is still far away, but the team's brain trust is at least considering starting Hentgen, the nominal #4, in the first series against Detroit, and saving the #3 man, Ted Lilly, to face the Red Sox. "That thought's already crossed our mind," said Ricciardi.

The skipper, who was in fine spirits, also told the gathering that Eric Hinske arrived at the complex February 2, some 15 pounds lighter, and his swing looks terrific. While J.P. cautioned that the big spenders in the AL East would be formidable opposition, Tosca just said "Bring 'em on."

Many of the people who asked questions have been season ticket holders since 1977, and the general mood was favourable. There were well-deserved complaints about the SkyDome concessions, to which Godfrey could only agree, saying the Jays might be the only big league team without a say in that part of their operation. As you might expect, a few people who own season's tickets in the 500 level were somewhat resentful of the Toronto Star $81 deal appreciated by many of us on lower budgets.

Pat Elster, brother of former big-leaguer Kevin Elster and a former owner of independent teams in the Western Baseball League, was the other head table guest. The newly-appointed Vice President of Ticket Sales & Service for the Jays agreed that the Star deal was "unfair" to those paying over $600 a year for the same seats, and for that reason, it has been cancelled.

If you've already renewed your $81 pass, consider yourself lucky. I don't think they will be rescinded; that would be a horrible PR move. If you received the renewal application but have procrastinated, you may not be so fortunate. If you were waiting to buy one at the box office, too bad. The surprise announcement was met with nods of approval throughout the restaurant, but I don't expect it to be as popular in this corner. It wasn't all bad news from Elster; season ticket sales are at their highest rate in ten years.

There's a lot more to report from an interesting evening, but it's getting late. I'll try to make another quick post in the morning, before going out of town on a computer installation. I enjoyed renewing acquaintances with people I met last season. Most of the media types are looking forward to going to Florida, for some reason. Jerry Howarth, who did a wonderful job as emcee, agreed to step into Da Box for an interview in April. In the morning, J.P. had appeared on CablePulse 24, and he talked briefly to the assembled press after the event, yet in the middle of that busy day, he found some time to chat with me. You can expect a Box exclusive spring training preview with the GM on Monday.

I also met some fascinating people for the first time, including Jeff Blair of the Globe, whose work I've always admired. In a very brief conversation, I learned quite a lot about that other Canadian team, as Blair still keeps a close eye on the Expos. A couple of our regular readers were nice enough to introduce themselves, as did Maxwell Kates, who organizes the meetings of the local SABR chapter. Another SABR member, Ken Warren, gave me a copy of his amazing book, Ballpark Figures 2004. I haven't had time to delve into it yet, and may pass it on to my more statistically-adept colleagues for a detailed review, but even at first glance, it's great. Warren's 2004 player forecasts are endorsed by Gary Huckabay of Baseball Prospectus, and there are many other terrific features. I wish I had this at the start of my Diamond Mind auction with those TRHL sharks.

OK, I'm officially getting sleepy. To be continued...
Tosca: Aiming For Playoffs | 90 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
_Roger Davis - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 12:57 AM EST (#78821) #
http://www.immune26.tv
Tosca says; 94 - 96 wins and a Playoff spot.

We could do it.

I've been telling everyone that will listen that we will have 128 games in 04 that will be STARTED by pitchers with a better "Batting Average Against" (BAA) than in 03, AND over 250 Bullpen innings by pitchers with a better BAA.

We played the Yanks and BSox 9 wins and 10 losses each in 03. They are going to get a real surprise this year. We are going to kick some serious butt.
_Jurgen - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 01:36 AM EST (#78822) #
Something to dampen your spirits somewhat...

Granted, even the Crank acknowledges that Established Win Shares Level isn' the best way to evaluate a young club like the Jays.

But it goes to show it's going to take a lot more than the Yanks missing Aaron Boone for the Jays to make the playoffs.
_David Armitage - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 02:09 AM EST (#78823) #
Caught the tail end of The Score's report on the evening's festivities, on top of what Coach has observed, it feels good to be this enthusiastic heading into Spring Training. Even if we finish the year with 88-90 wins, every one truly seems to have a good attitude going into camp. The only forseeable distraction at this point seems to be Carlos' impending FA status, hopefully the media focus more on the club this year rather than picking at off the field issues.
_Keith Talent - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 02:32 AM EST (#78824) #
Great post, really great post. Damn, I'm so pumped for this season. Keith Talent is coming to Toronto: a man who has cheered from Vancouver (and Seattle whenever the Jays visit) for almost 20 years is moving to Toronto, in the most promising of years. YOU WILL SEE ME: AND WE WILL ROCK THIS YEAR. Tosca says we can't reload, I'm happy about our talent in the minors, should Mr. Injury come I hope we might be able to see a miracle. Hell: the Twins won the World Series with new uniforms in 1987. And hell: to hell with hype: Boston and New York are old. Go Moneyball! I'm ranting but loved this piece and love the Jays. JP Riccardi signed my copy of "Moneyball" in Seattle this year - damn this is gonna be a great summer, see ya at SkyDome: happy to meet you, get in touch!
_Warse - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 04:58 AM EST (#78825) #
Personally, I think anything less than a 90 win season would have to be considered a disappointment - barring injuries, I don't see an reason why this team shouldn't win between 90 and 95 games.

I do, however, take exception to Tosca's assertion that 94-96 wins will be sufficient to make the playoffs. Firstly, I can't see the AL East champ winning less than 100 games. If one accepts this assumption and combines it with Tosca's assumption that 95 wins will assure a playoff berth, then for the Jays to make the playoffs, one of the Red Sox and Yankees, and two of the A's, Angels and Mariners will have to win less than 95 games, while we will have to win more.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love a playoff berth.....I just think 2005 is a little more realistic.
_Scott - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 07:08 AM EST (#78826) #
A couple of my takeaways from the meeting:

JP said that Rosario would be among the pitchers that could surprise in 2004. He is going to start the season in Dunedin but will be in Manchester "no later than mid-May" and could be in Syracuse before long. He was throwing 94,95 in the instructional league.

Adam Peterson also got a mention, throwing 98,99 (although JP said you couldn't trust the gun in the minor leagues) with a nasty slider.

JP also talked about Hill and Adams and seemed to indicate that it would be Hill that would move from SS, most likely to 2b but possibly 3b and that it would be his bat that would get him to the majors.

They seemed to be open to the idea of Quiroz possibly challenging Cash at some point during the season and that the new bench coach would be working closely with the catchers.

Call-ups to replace injured or ineffective pithers would come from the Bush/Arnold/Peterson/McGowan group rather than a six-year minor league type as in the past (i.e. no more John Wasdin).

Werth is the fourth outfielder and JP talked about him as a third catcher as well.
Dave Till - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 07:37 AM EST (#78827) #
I think 95 wins is a bit optimistic, though I hope to be proven wrong.

The offense is good, but they were hitting a bit over their heads during last summer's wonderful stretch (in which the entire American League looked like a bunch of batting practice pitchers). And I predict that one of the starting pitchers and one or two of the relievers are going to collapse - unfortunately, it's impossible to predict which ones. No criticism of J.P. here - it's just the nature of pitching.

And, as is pointed out here, the Yanks and Red Sox can afford to reload if somebody doesn't perform up to snuff. In fact, Steinbrenner will insist on reloading if necessary. The only positive note here is that there aren't likely to be as many teams looking to dump players, so it's not like the Yanks and Sox can order up new players as if from a Sears catalog.

I don't mean to sound too gloomy - this should be an exciting team to watch, and the Jays should contend. And it's likely to get better from here.
_coliver - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 07:40 AM EST (#78828) #
I like the idea of carrying Werth as the 4th/5th outfielder and as the 3rd catcher. It would give Tosca more options during late game situations.

Hinske reporting to the complex 15 lbs lighter is a great sign. He seemed embarassed by his performance last year and I think he will regain his 2002 numbers, at least. Also, I think he learned that it is OK to have a injury treated...

Bring on 2004!!!
_Stan - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 08:29 AM EST (#78829) #
If the Blue Jays could have handled Tampa Bay the way they should have, they would've been in the thick of it. Blue Jay hitting was superb last year, but we can't expect Meyers to repeat last year. But I do think Hinske and Woodward will improve with the bat. Pitching is better and that should translate into something exciting.
Craig B - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 08:42 AM EST (#78830) #
a few people who own season's tickets in the 500 level were somewhat resentful of the Toronto Star $81 deal appreciated by many of us on lower budgets.

While the Season's Pass is NOT a season ticket (perhaps the team should have been more forceful in presenting this fact, but hindsight is 20/20) I can understand the reaction of the ST holders. I am one of those who is frozen out; I didn't get a Season Pass last year, and hadn't got around to it yet. That's OK; a little more money for a ticket just means a little less money for ballpark beer, and my waistline will thank me.

the Crank acknowledges that Established Win Shares Level isn' the best way to evaluate a young club like the Jays.

I don't think the Crank understands Win Shares very well, since he's trying to add together WS figures unadjusted for playing time.

Personally, I think anything less than a 90 win season would have to be considered a disappointment - barring injuries, I don't see an reason why this team shouldn't win between 90 and 95 games.

I'm not going to give my predictions away quite yet; that will wait for my season preview. All I will say is that I see a LOT of reasons why this team might not win 90 games. A much stronger AL, for one; a stronger AL East; depending on arms that will be worked harder than they have in the past; the need for repeats of career years by Wells and Halladay; a rightfielder who may hit the sophomiore jinx... there's all kinds of reasons.

On balance, the Jays look good on paper, certainly better than last year. That doesn't mean there aren't concerns, or it wouldn't be baseball. The Jays have a lot fewer reasons they might fall back than the Yankees (for instance) do; but they are starting a long way behind them!

YOU WILL SEE ME: AND WE WILL ROCK THIS YEAR.

Keith Talent is getting me pumped! :)

You can expect a Box exclusive spring training preview with the GM on Monday.

We cannot stress this enough. Now you have a reason to look forward to Monday!
_Gwyn - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 08:43 AM EST (#78831) #
Sounds like you had a great night Kent, I'm looking forward to you're chat with JP and hope its as good as the last one.

The Star Season Pass option still seems to be available at bluejays.com. Although I signed up for one online a few weeks ago and I haven't got anything through the mail yet.
_John Northey - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 08:59 AM EST (#78832) #
The $81 pass was always interesting, but due to the fact it is an additional $7.40 for me (due to GO train costs, or $5 for parking [great basement parking right near the dome]) I just couldn't go enough to make it worthwhile. The bottom line for the Jays though is, are enough people coming to compensate for the $600 season pass people who quit due to the cheap tickets? For each person who shifts they need another 6 to make up for it. If the Jays owned the dome it would be a different equation as they'd get all the concession money.

Reading between the lines, the Jays are not happy with the SkyDome managment and I wonder if they are debating when a good time would be to start pushing for a new park. Should Toronto go for the 2012 Olympics don't be surprised if the Jays get into the act, pushing for a new open air/real grass stadium as part of the deal.
_Ken - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 09:05 AM EST (#78833) #
Can't wait 'til monday.
Good news on season ticket figures and Hinske.
I love it when the Box has something exclusive and unique, thank you Coach for going, organising chat with J.P., interview with Howard etc etc etc :)

Seems, as well, as though JP is happy with Rosario. Scott, I would be interested on how JP seemed to indicate Hill would be more likely to move? Thanks
_eljah - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 09:32 AM EST (#78834) #
I am really glad to hear that callups will come from our young guys and not of the Wasdin variety. I am really looking forward to when Bush/McGowan/Peterson et al. reach the big leagues.
_Andrew Edwards - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 09:32 AM EST (#78835) #
Exciting stuff, all around. I can't wait fo rthe season to start.

I want to emphasize that I have no reason to believe that there's anything untoward about Eric, but every time I hear about a player showing up 15 pounds lighter this year, I can't help but wonder whether the new drug testing regime is the reason. Does anyone have any thoughts on this?
Coach - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 09:34 AM EST (#78836) #
If the Blue Jays could have handled Tampa Bay the way they should have, they would've been in the thick of it.

The manager couldn't agree with you more, Stan. When he was asked about Delgado's four homer game (which the smaller Carlos said at the time was the greatest thing he'd seen in 25 years in the dugout) Tosca broke up the house by quipping, "I was just glad we beat the Devil Rays," and pointed out how many of those clouts tied the game or gave the Jays a lead.

When Jerry Howarth mentioned that he would a lot of new hands to shake, referring to the changes in the bullpen, Tosca said, "I hope to be shaking them out in he middle of the field."

hopefully the media focus more on the club this year rather than picking at off the field issues.

You know, I watched the TSN report this morning (I admit it, I was hoping to see my mug in the scrum around J.P., but not even my hand made the shot) and it's been edited down to the Delgado "issue," which the GM must already be tired of dealing with. I don't know how many times, in how many ways, he has to say "we want him to stay, and we'll talk after the season," before some people actually hear it.

J.P. mentioned some health concerns about Josh Phelps, whose back bothered him at one point. The "everyday DH" also had his knee cleaned out after the season, but "he's going into spring training healthy, and he's going to get a lot of reps at first base."

Ricciardi said they asked Hinske to lose a little weight, to get back to being "lighter on his feet" as he was in 2002. But he also pointed out that there are no worries about the power of a guy who "played six weeks with a broken hand, then sat out, and still hit almost 50 doubles."

As Scott reported, they are very excited about Francisco Rosario, who has pitched "like he's in midseason form" already. They expect him in Machester by May or June, "and he may even breeze through that," joining McGowan, Bush and Arnold in a talented Syracuse rotation. Vinny Chulk, by the way, will be in the SkyChiefs' bullpen, preparing for his next audition, but you can expect Adam Peterson to be the AAA closer.

Asked if he would be disappointed if the club doesn't make the playoffs, Ricciardi said, "It depends on how we play," suggesting that if they win close to 100 games but somehow don't make the cut, that could hardly be called a disappointing season.

I got the expected reply to my query about getting help from outside, not just AAA, if they are in contention in midseason. "It's going to depend on where we're at, and our ability to go to Mr. Rogers and ask if he'd be willing to let us do some things. But it's a nice comfort knowing that we've got some players down there who can help us."

Believe it or not, I still have more material to share with you, just no time, sorry. I hope to check in again this evening, but I'll be on the road all day.
_Robbie Goldberg - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 09:43 AM EST (#78837) #
I'll defenitely be very interested in following Rosario's performance this year. If he's already throwing 95, then there's little to suggest he won't make a full comeback. I know many of us knocked BA for putting Rosario at #5 --- and while it is way too early to tell --- it sounds like they had some very good scouting insights into his recovery. I know ML pitchers seldom work out like we expect, but I don't think it's crazy to suggest that McGowan, Bush and probably one of Arnold or Rosario will be in the Jays rotation come 2005. Ricciardi is following the Gillick model in that even though it seems like there could be 8-10 guys that could theoretically start later this year and down the road, "Ya can never have too many pitchers."
_MatO - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 09:43 AM EST (#78838) #
Should Toronto go for the 2012 Olympics don't be surprised if the Jays get into the act, pushing for a new open air/real grass stadium as part of the deal.

It's widely held that Toronto won't try for the 2012 Olympics since Vancouver won its bid for 2010. If the Jays want a new stadium I'm afraid Mr. Rogers will have to come up with the money.
_Andrew Edwards - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 09:56 AM EST (#78839) #
Ricciardi said they asked Hinske to lose a little weight, to get back to being "lighter on his feet" as he was in 2002.

OK, question answered.
Named For Hank - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 09:56 AM EST (#78840) #
The Star Season Pass option still seems to be available at bluejays.com. Although I signed up for one online a few weeks ago and I haven't got anything through the mail yet.

I renewed mine over the phone when the guy called back in December, and I haven't received anything in the mail yet, so I don't see any need to panic.

Last year I picked up mine at the ballpark after ordering it over the phone.

I heard a couple of clips from the fete on the FAN 590 this morning, and Tosca sure sounded pumped up. That's what I like to hear! I'm counting down the days to Opening Day...
_Mike B - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 10:17 AM EST (#78841) #
Gwyn or Named For Hank: Have you been charged yet for the Star Season Pass?
_coliver - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 10:22 AM EST (#78842) #
Enough of the new stadium wishing!!! SkyDome is fine! It is the management of the Dome that is a problem.
_R Billie - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 10:29 AM EST (#78843) #
A lot of encouraging things here. Despite Tosca's goal of reaching in the neighbourhood of 95 wins though, I think we have to look at the team and the division soberly and conclude that the Jays would do amazingly well to win about 90 games. Even if all they manage is to improve on last year's 86 wins it has to be considered progress. Every other team in the AL East has improved themselves and some very significantly and in order for the Jays to win more they have to take wins away from their competition. Nevermind the Yankees and Sox who I think both have a good chance to be better than last year, the Orioles and Devil Rays both have potential to play better.

The Jays may well be better on paper but might only win one or two more games than last year. Or even win fewer despite the deeper pitching staff and prospects coming up. The Red Sox and Yankees are just too good barring unforeseen injuries and the Orioles and DRays aren't standing still. Though the DRays are relying a lot more on improvement from young players.
_R Billie - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 10:41 AM EST (#78844) #
I got a call from the Jays not many days after the World Series ended asking if I wanted to renew my Toronto Star passes. I renewed them on the spot. Even if I miss half the games there's no better deal going IMO. I don't blame season ticket holders for not liking the deal; placing aside the fact that the passes are not technically season tickets and don't offer the additional benefits, the core product is in essence the same.

Rosario if he's healthy could very well become the best pitcher in the Jays' system by midseason. I don't know if he can stay in the rotation but I hope he can. He'd be extremely valuable even out of the bullpen though. I think he has Rafael Soriano type of potential in either role...the difference being that Rosario actually has an established plus changeup which I think is more useful than a breaking ball anyway. An '05 rotation featuring Halladay, Batista, Lilly, and Rosario/McGowan/Bush at the back end would be a lot better than a kick in the pants.
Named For Hank - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 12:02 PM EST (#78845) #
Have you been charged yet for the Star Season Pass?

Yep, back in December.
_GregH - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 01:08 PM EST (#78846) #
An open-air stadium?

Oh ye of short memories, who don't recall the "joys" of open-air baseball in Toronto in April, often in May, sometimes in late September and (hopefully over the next few years) in October as well.

I can remember being at many early season games in Exhibition Stadium when us in the cheap seats would chant "We want a Dome".

Incidentally, I seem to remember when the Skydome was being proposed and built it being said that it would be technically possible to have real grass. One of the main reasons against it was the problem of the Argos making a mess of the grass during their games. If the Argos get a stadium at Varsity, any chance of grass coming into the Dome? Probably just wishful thinking.

I was delighted to hear of Tosca's comments - I think he has really challenged the team to perform. (Has he also put his own future on the line?)

I also think 93-96 wins could happen. The team won 86 last year when it couldn't beat Tampa Bay for love or money and when at least 12 games were blown by the bullpen. The rotation and bullpen have been strengthened and even if the offence declines slightly, it should be much more than adequate for that number of wins. Imagine the late September and early October games against the Yankees if the Jays are on track for mid-90 wins!

Bring it on.
_John Northey - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 01:10 PM EST (#78847) #
Ah, stadium wishing. It isn't so much wishing for one as expecting the Jays to want a bigger piece of the pie. I forgot about Vancouver 2010 to be honest, thus the 2012 Olympics are definately out. However, given Toronto's addiction to trying for big things I wouldn't be surprised to see it go for a World Expo which they tried to get for 2000. In truth, that would be better for the city long term than an Olympics imo, although I think the Jays would have trouble mixing a stadium into it.

I would be shocked if the Jays aren't trying to think of a better stadium situation (money) and building one themselves isn't a realistic option. Hmm... the Argos want out of Skydome, there is a need for a big soccer stadium, could the two mix with the Jays on a multi-purpose outdoor stadium? Doubtful, but about the only park option I can see.

As for the preseason stuff, sounds good. Can't wait for the first real games to start!
_R Billie - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 01:14 PM EST (#78848) #
Tosca's contract is up after the coming season. His future may be on the line anyway so he might as well push this team to have the best year that it can.
robertdudek - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 01:29 PM EST (#78849) #
A multi-purpose park would be worse than the Dome.

If Toronto ever gets the summer games, there will be no baseball stadium built as part of that package. The mainn (Olympic) stadium must accomodate a 400-metre track and have upwards of 60,000 in seating - that would make it the worst place to play baseball in MLB by a country mile. I seriously doubt that the Olympic committe will build a state-of-the-art baseball park in addition to a new Olympic stadium.
Named For Hank - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 01:50 PM EST (#78850) #
What do people dislike so much about the SkyDome, anyways? Aside from the turf and the deadness of the crowd, is there really anything wrong with the Dome?
robertdudek - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 02:02 PM EST (#78851) #
Turf is the main problem. If we can't have grass, then installing turf that looks like grass would be a big improvement.

My other pet peeve is that the roof remains closed on days when it's 15 degrees with hardly a cloud in the sky, or if there's a threat of a shower within a 500km radius.

Skydome has fairly good ambiance when the roof is open; when it's closed it's deadening.
_Jobu - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 02:03 PM EST (#78852) #
I gotta say, this looks like the first bad move I've ever seen by J.P. The star passes dont offer any of the perks of upper deck season tickets like firts dibs at playoff tickets or the meet and greet last night, there's a reason real season tickets cost so much more. What a shame if they are cancelled. Me and four friends of mine were about to buy some star passes for this year but it looks like we may be left in the wind now. We're just a bunch of university guys so we didnt have a credit card to buy them online, and clearly cant afford real season tickets on our budget. This seems like a real slap in the face for Joe McAverageIncome. Now a summer of seeing every home game we can becomes a summer of 5 or 6 Jays games and sitting around the house.... just magical.
_David Armitage - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 02:23 PM EST (#78853) #
If the Argos get a stadium at Varsity, any chance of grass coming into the Dome?

My understanding of the situation was that the Argos, along with the Canadian Soccer Association have been working together for a proposed 30,000 seat open air stadium on the former exhibition grounds. I think this proposal was introduced sometime last fall, and the estimated cost was pegged around $80 million. Such a stadium would not be able to accommodate baseball, nor would it include a track.

As a huge soccer fan (go Birmingham) the prospect of a new venue in Toronto is welcoming, however there are many question marks surrounding the proposal already. Primarily, what type of government contribution the project would receive from all 3 levels. Also, both the Argos and the CSA would like to be considered primary tenants of the stadium. This means that FieldTurf would likely be used to prevent the football games from destroying the grass. The difficulty with this is that lines for both games have to be painted on the field, which runs against FIFA requirements for official pitch conditions.

With the Argos recently welcoming new owners, and given their bad deal with Skydome management, they can't afford to stay much longer. The Varsity deal at this point sounds more likely to proceed, but hopefully everyone's interests can be satisfied in the near future.

I also wonder why nobody has made a move to install FieldTurf at the Dome yet, unless it has some adverse affect on balls in play (in soccer the ball bounces harder than on a normal playing surface)
_A - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 02:31 PM EST (#78854) #
In fairness this was unlikely a call made by JP, much more likely it was Paul Godfrey...That said, hell will rise should my Christmas present become invalid because some guy with 600 bucks in his pocket feels like he got screwed out of a couple dollars. I'm not a financial consultant for many, many good reasons but common sense tells me spending your last $600 on season tickets means you've made the wrong investment.
_Tassle - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 02:59 PM EST (#78855) #
They haven't installed FieldTurf at the dome yet because whoever owns the SkyDome refuses to pay to install it and the Jays refuse to pay to install it, mostly on principal I believe. If SkyDome gets so much of the profit pie the Jays would get if they had a better lease, the Jays believe they should pay for some maintenance. But when even the Montreal Expos get it before us, it starts to irritate me.
_GregH - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 03:10 PM EST (#78856) #
My understanding of the situation was that the Argos, along with the Canadian Soccer Association have been working together for a proposed 30,000 seat open air stadium on the former exhibition grounds.

(Sorry David Armitage, I don't know how to italicize here)

Yesterday reps from Maple Leaf Sports & Entertainment, the Argos and the CSA met the members of the Federal Liberal GTA Caucus in Ottawa to discuss a proposed 25,000 seat stadium (among other things) to be built on the former Varsity Stadium grounds near Bloor and Queen's Park for about $130M. Apparently the participants at this pojnt are not asking for government money (amazing in itself) but are asking for loan guarantees.

The Caucus, led by Art Eggleton, is apparently favourably impressed and the indication is that action may come very soon.
_Jordan - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 03:12 PM EST (#78857) #
My other pet peeve is that the roof remains closed on days when it's 15 degrees with hardly a cloud in the sky, or if there's a threat of a shower within a 500km radius

I am so down with that. A friend of mine put it exactly right: the default setting on the Dome should be Open, with closing occuring in cases of rain, snow or uncomfortably cold temperatures. Instead, the default setting is Closed, with opening occuring if it's 22 C and sunny, maybe. Just another reason I wished the Jays owned the stadium.
_Ryan - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 03:20 PM EST (#78858) #
If Toronto ever gets the summer games, there will be no baseball stadium built as part of that package. The mainn (Olympic) stadium must accomodate a 400-metre track and have upwards of 60,000 in seating - that would make it the worst place to play baseball in MLB by a country mile.

Not if they copied what Atlanta did. The Olympic Stadium/Turner Field was designed to be renovated for baseball after the games were over. Much of the structure was designed for baseball specifically, with about 30,000 extra seats built to accomodate the Olympics and then be removed. Most of Turner Field's current structure was part of the Olympic Stadium.

If the Blue Jays still wanted a stadium with a roof, that would complicate things (depending on the creativity of the engineers). If they wanted a more conventional ballpark, Atlanta has shown that it's certainly possible to turn an Olympic Stadium into a good ballpark.
_A - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 03:24 PM EST (#78859) #
I don't mean to be overly pragmatic but does anyone know if there's a valid reason for keeping the Dome closed? The way the Jays have done their market research about ticket sales and the general product they put together for fans, it seems like they've either left a massive gap in their delivery of the product since you only hear people who are disappointed about being kept indoors on a nice day OR there's truly a reason to keep it closed.

Kent, if you could ask JP about the issues surrounding this it might put the issue to bed.
_Ryan - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 03:32 PM EST (#78860) #
I don't mean to be overly pragmatic but does anyone know if there's a valid reason for keeping the Dome closed?

The roof is weather sealed during the winter, which is why it's sometimes closed on nice days in early-April. I know there's some preparation in order to open it for the first time of the year, but that's the only explanation I've heard.
Pistol - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 03:50 PM EST (#78861) #
This seems like a real slap in the face for Joe McAverageIncome.

I'm not so sure about that. $1 tickets are a gimmick to get people into the park. That should be looked at as a bonus from the team, not a slap in the face when they do away with it. You can't even get minor league tickets that cheap. It's unrealistic to expect a major league team to do that.

Baseball tickets are pretty affordable if you don't mind not being in the best seats. Myself, I've always liked the LF or RF seats and those are fairly affordable (I like them a lot better than the seats from 1B & 3B to the foul line - that's a bad perspective for me).
_Ryan01 - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 03:58 PM EST (#78862) #
I want to emphasize that I have no reason to believe that there's anything untoward about Eric, but every time I hear about a player showing up 15 pounds lighter this year, I can't help but wonder whether the new drug testing regime is the reason. Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

Not that this is irrefutable proof of Hinske's innocence or anything, but I remember Hinske's comments during the 2002 season shortly after Canseco's accusations and the whole steroid issue really came to light in MLB. At a time when nearly every player was extremely tight-lipped about the whole situation, Hinske came out and stated, quite emphatically, that using steroids was cheating and that MLB should absolutely be testing for their use. From the way he looked last season, he could have shed 15 pounds of fat fairly easily without any loss in muscle.

As for Werth being the 3rd catcher as well as backup OF, I'm very happy to hear that. The "Eli Marrero" role is one that one that would allow him to get enough at-bats to allow him to develop and not get pushed off the team by Gross/Rios. Hopefully with the help of Breeden, Jayson can refresh his catching skills without too much trouble after an entire year off.
_A - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 04:01 PM EST (#78863) #
For me it's more the idea of 'the rich kids crying foul so the promotion's out the window' part of the story that bugs me. If season ticket holders in the 500 level liked the idea of 81/81 then they could have purchased it for themselves...In fact, they could have bought 7 of them and still had $45 left over. But they like their perks.
_Greg H - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 04:02 PM EST (#78864) #
I agree with Pistol. Jays tickets are a tremendous bargain. Even without getting a flex pack, last year I was able to take my wife and 8 and 9 year old sons to games in the Upper Skydeck for less than $23.00 - kids prices were less than the adult $7.00 price and because I have Rogers cable, internet and cell phone, I get 20% off. This year the price has gone up slightly, but now includes the Lower Skydeck. There aren't many things a family of 4 can do for less than $25.00 to $30.00 that are nearly as entertaining as a ballgame.

I quite enjoy sitting up there as well, especially when the roof is open. My boys aren't sophisticated enough yet to distinguish say a slider from a sinker, so they don't need to be real close, the banking of the seats there means no one's head obstructs their view and they are able to see the whole field. We usually sit very slightly to the 1b or 3b side of the plate. The other good thing has been that its not been crowded up there, although hopefully that will change soon!
Craig B - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 04:19 PM EST (#78865) #
A, these "rich kids crying foul" are the ones who pay the piper. They own season's tickets, and in most cases have done so for years. They have every right to point out that a comparable product is being offered cheap, and ask for the same price break!
_A - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 04:33 PM EST (#78866) #
It isn't compareable. We aren't even garunteed a seat. Plus, this wasn't exactly a last minute offer that suddenly came up. If they were displeased with it last year, switching over to 81/81 was their perogitive. However, the team offers perks to season ticket holders that obviously entices them to renew, even with the 81/81 deal on the table. It seems to me they still get their much coveted exclusivity (why else would they renew if this package was being offered? It's not as if the Jays are a charitable organization) and we get our game for a very, very affordable price that will surely fill seats that would otherwise go empty.
_Jordan - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 04:45 PM EST (#78867) #
Regarding Hinske (wasn't that a Harrison Ford movie?) -- I agree that he's lost fat, not muscle mass, this off-season. Not that I'm one to talk, but he definitely looked heavier, and unnecessarily so, last season than in 2002. He'll never be a streamlined greyhound, and that body type (which I share) has to be kept in check or it gets away from you. Nonetheless, I'm very glad to hear he's fitter; combined with his recovery from injury, Eric's going to be a bargain in a lot of fantasy leagues this year.
_nic 6 - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 04:51 PM EST (#78869) #
Dear Kieth;
See you at the Skydome. Go Jays Go.
Yours,
Nicola Six.
P.S. How's the Darts?
_Rob - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 04:51 PM EST (#78870) #
I don't think I've said this before but I find the level of discussion on this site to be far superior to anything Jays-related I've ever seen, except for that one idiot who said put Tim Salmon at first :)

I don't understand why the Dome isn't open more often. I find nothing wrong with the Dome, sitting in the first deck over the Jays' bullpen with 25-degree weather and a 6-0 score against the Yanks. However, there are not many things worse than looking up at the sky on a nice July day and seeing catwalks and that fireworks apparatus.

Does anyone know how much it would cost the Jays to buy SkyDome?
Joe - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 05:07 PM EST (#78871) #
http://me.woot.net
Let's kill several birds with one post, shall we?

For italicised text, type <i>For italicised text</i>—but be careful to do them both, and in the right order. If in doubt, preview.

As for turf, Godfrey has been asked about it before, and his response has been that the turf is actually fairly new (i.e., it has recently been replaced), and for that reason there was no need seen for it.

Finally, I was considering buying a 81 game pass too, but eventually passed it up since I'll be away at school in Waterloo during the prime Jays time (May-August). I have always preferred the skydeck to field level seats (except for ridiculously good seats), and the other primary baseball viewer in my circle of immediate family & friends, my dad, is the same, but we just wouldn't go to enough games to justify the price.
_Scott - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 05:41 PM EST (#78872) #
I believe the turf was replaced in 1997 at a cost of around C$2M. It has an estimated life of 14 years, meaning we are at the halfway point. I believe this info is in the media guide, if anybody wants to double check.

As for the cost of the Skydome, I think Sportsco purchased it for around the bargin basement price of $80M.

I found Godfrey's answer regarding buying the dome last night a bit strange. He said quite strongly that Ted Rogers had no interest in buying the facility and that the ideal solution would be that the Jays would just take over the management of the ballpark. But this to me suggests more costs and headaches for the Jays without any improvement on the revenue front--just fewer customer complaints.

If I had to guess somewhere deep in the files of Godfrey's office are plans for a new baseball-only stadium, which will magically appear after the next world series win. I hope, anyway.
_Brande - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 05:48 PM EST (#78873) #
http://premium.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2557
I can't criticze Tosca's enthusiam but ... though the Jays are an exciting team, they have two huge obstacles to a playoff berth. Baseball Prospectus has a free (and sobering) article today on the Yanks and Sox. COMN to read it.
Pepper Moffatt - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 06:41 PM EST (#78874) #
http://economics.about.com
I can't criticze Tosca's enthusiam but ... though the Jays are an exciting team, they have two huge obstacles to a playoff berth. Baseball Prospectus has a free (and sobering) article today on the Yanks and Sox. COMN to read it.

It's funny.. I was thumbing through the PECOTA forecasts a few days ago (one of the perks of being a Premium member), and they don't have a lot of optimism for the Jays. In total they project the Jays to win about 78 games, whereas the Red Sox and Yankees are both going to be around 100. Might it be a longer season than we all imagine?

Cheers,
Gitz - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 06:56 PM EST (#78875) #
Seventy-eight wins? That's preposterous. Even if Lilly and Batista bomb -- highly doubtful that BOTH will, and, like most of us, I think Batista is going to really shine -- they won't bomb any worse than Lidle. And if anything Halladay may be even better this year. We know the offense is fine. PECOTA is fun and all, but this clearly shows its limitations. At worst, the Jays will do what they did last year. And if the Yankees implode and the A's start losing games 3-2 instead of winning them 2-1, then it's possible the Jays will be there in October.
Craig B - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 07:10 PM EST (#78876) #
78 wins is right near the bottom of my projection results. But it is definitely possible.
_Keith Talent - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 07:16 PM EST (#78877) #
Did you say your name was Nicola Sex? Keith can't believe his luck. Damn: just dropped a dart on my big toe. Schilling and Pedro are sissies, Manny's a moron, Nomar's a baby. The Yanks? Sheffield's gonna coast with minimal effort for 2 years, Giambi's will either get suspended for steroid use or outgrow his knees, it's Jeter's time to get cynical, Steinbrenner will have his molesting hands everywhere.
Pepper Moffatt - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 07:19 PM EST (#78878) #
http://economics.about.com
Seventy-eight wins? That's preposterous. Even if Lilly and Batista bomb -- highly doubtful that BOTH will, and, like most of us, I think Batista is going to really shine -- they won't bomb any worse than Lidle. And if anything Halladay may be even better this year. We know the offense is fine.

PECOTA argues that the offense isn't fine. In fact, it has them having the 4th best offense in the AL East, slightly behind Baltimore.

I didn't spend a ton of time going through individual projections, but I noticed a few things. One is that it's quite down on both Lilly and Hentgen. It has Vernon Wells regressing somewhat, and Reed Johnson and Crash being around replacement level. Delgado and Halladay also don't perform as well as they did in 2003. The only player who seems to improve at all is Hinske, who is projected to have a higher VORP than Wells. It does seem to like Jayson Werth, tho.

I thought the numbers were overly alarmist as well, but it is a sobering thought.

Cheers,

Mike
_DS - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 07:39 PM EST (#78879) #
Checking out that Prospectus article really shows part of the problem of evaluating players. Pedro is shown as being 70 VORP where as Halladay is listed as 48.5 VORP. Knowing that Halladay will probably pitch at least 50 more innings than Pedro at only a marginally worse rate, who is truly more valuable? I would definitely take Pedro in his prime over Halladay. But right now? Not a chance. Injury risk and durability should be factored in to these ratings.
Pepper Moffatt - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 07:41 PM EST (#78880) #
http://economics.about.com
Injury risk and durability should be factored in to these ratings.

They are! That's the scary thing. :)

Cheers,

Mike
Mike D - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 09:00 PM EST (#78881) #
It doesn't surprise me that PECOTA predicts Hinske to come up big and for Wells and Sparky to regress. I also think that PECOTA will be wrong -- again -- about Wells.

My sense from reading PECOTA is that it loves -- and I mean loves -- walks and the men who draw them.

Of course, I (and most everybody here) love walks too. But there are two related, and fairly rigidly applied, principles that I would suggest (from my admittedly outside vantage point) are valued heavily by PECOTA:

1. Drawing walks is a skill that hitters either have or don't have. Plate discipline for a hitter is therefore unlikely to improve or deteriorate.

2. An on-base percentage predicated on a lot of walks is rock-solid. An on-base percentage predicated on a high batting average without many walks is volatile and therefore unsustainable.

So therefore, according to PECOTA, Hinske will improve by a typical amount on his guy-who-walks-a-lot career path as he matures as a hitter, while free-swinging Vernon's batting average was, in part, a fluke.

PECOTA is objective -- there are plenty of reasons why this is a good thing -- but it doesn't see these guys play, and obviously doesn't include the Dreaded Intangibles. Vernon's plate discipline improved by 15 walks from 2002 to 2003 and will likely improve by 20 more walks this year; PECOTA won't (I don't think) give him credit for that. Delgado on deck is, in my opinion, a more significant cap on Vernon's walks than is his own approach at the plate.

Meanwhile, every year is the year that Eric Hinske -- or, say, Bobby Kielty or (gasp) Jeremy Giambi -- will really break out and kick some OPS behind.

Of course, the human/individual element of baseball proves exceptions to every rule. Vernon Wells is like Garret Anderson: an ability to make consistent hard contact can, in the cases of exceptional talent, sustain a BA-driven OBP. Does anyone sincerely maintain that Garret Anderson's year-in, year-out production is fluky?

As I said, these are my anecdotal, subjective, non-scientific observations of PECOTA's tendencies. I would love for someone more familiar with the formula to correct my misgivings!

And Gitz is right. 78 wins is completely out of the question. For the Jays to lose 84 games, they would have to (a) drop a bunch of games to the AL West, NL West (hee) or AL Central (hahahahaha), or (b) really, really get pasted by the Yankees and Red Sox head-to-head this season.

Ain't gonna happen, gents. Toronto wins 84, at the absolute minimum.
_perlhack - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 09:03 PM EST (#78882) #
Halladay will probably pitch at least 50 more innings than Pedro at only a marginally worse rate

I don't think Pedro is just marginally better than Halladay. Certainly, Halladay's durability (and the extra IP that comes with it) add worth, but Pedro is a far more dominating pitcher when he's on the mound. However, I don't think the gap should be as wide as BP suggests with VORP.
robertdudek - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 09:20 PM EST (#78883) #
Considering the drop in Pedro's velocity over the past few years, I'm not so sure he's more than marginally better than Halladay going into 2004.
Coach - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 09:20 PM EST (#78884) #
Adam, it's not as if I talk to J.P. all the time; that's still a special occasion. I'll try to investigate through other channels about the "default setting of closed" for the roof, but I suspect that it's out of the ball club's hands, like the concessions and the turf. It sucks that the Jays are tenants, and the landlords don't care about their customers, but that's the reality. Not only is Rogers unlikely to be shopping for a stadium, Paul Godfrey mentioned last night that it isn't for sale.

'the rich kids crying foul so the promotion's out the window'

That's not the case at all. I'm sorry if I gave the impression that one person complained, causing Elster to make a snap decision on the spot to cancel the $81 passes. Pat simply took the opportunity of the man's question to convey some information. Sure, it was better received by that crowd than it might have been at a Cheer Club meeting. However, it may even have been a premature announcement, given that they are still for sale on the Official Site. You guys know as much as I do about what happens next. As I said, I'm quite sure the passes that have been issued won't be rescinded, but until someone tries to buy one and is officially told they're off the market, we won't know if the "new policy" has actually been implemented.

A few more notes from last night:

J.P. spoke highly of Dave Maurer, signed to a minor-league deal with a spring training invitation. "He's got a very good arm, and he's coming off Tommy John surgery about sixteen months ago, so we think he can help us. Along with Bruce Chen, that gives us four lefties to look at."

Paul Godfrey agreed with a fan who believes that more teams getting into the playoffs would be a good thing, because other sports do it. Godfrey explained that change in baseball "moves at a crawl," but did mention a Commissioner's Panel on marketing the game is looking at that and other issues, with recommendations coming perhaps by the middle of this season. Just in case there's anyone left who doesn't know where I stand on the "everybody in the tournament" idea, I think it should be limited to house leagues for kids. I want those two April series with the Red Sox to really matter.

There was laughter when someone pointed out that Ricciardi's contract, along with those of Halladay, Wells, and Hinske, will expire in four years, and wondered what would happen after that. J.P. made it clear that four years is quite a long commitment for teams and players in today's game, then Godfrey added that the GM, instead of pursuing an opportunity to take the Boston job after a successful first year, tore up his original deal to make a five-year commitment to Toronto.

Questioned about whether the team was ahead of his original plan, J.P. was cautiously optimistic. "I think we've come a little faster than I thought we would. Winning 86 games last year was a little more than we might have thought when we broke spring training, and I think we're ready to raise the bar. Hopefully, we'll make life a little more interesting for the Yankees and the Red Sox."

Toronto wins 84, at the absolute minimum.

While 78 wins may be within the realm of statistical possibility (the injury bug would have to develop a particularly nasty bite) I think it's highly unlikely. However, given the additions all four East rivals have made, and Anaheim's huge leap forward with Guerrero, Colon and maybe even that other pitcher, the Jays will have to be considerably better just to match their 86 wins. Well, they are. No matter what PECOTA says, there's absolutely nothing wrong with the offence. Kevin Cash won't match Tommy Wilson's first half, and maybe Crash will be merely good, instead of awesome. A healthy Hinske, clear vision for Cat and more consistent AB for Phelps should make up the difference.

To me, the whole season depends on the pitching staff. What else is new? I consider Batista at least a match for Escobar, so by my crude reckoning, they've improved by the difference between Lilly and Hendrickson, plus the difference between Hentgen and Lidle v. 2003, plus the effect of the bullpen overhaul. I agree with Mike D.'s worst-case number, my guess is 92-93 wins, and I'm excited about Tosca's 94-96 projection, but even that could miss the wild card by a whisker.
Pepper Moffatt - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 09:30 PM EST (#78885) #
http://economics.about.com
I was playing around with the numbers a bit more. Without getting into any real detail (buy your own subscription!), PECOTA says the following:

Massive declines for Delgado, Wells, Halladay, and Myers. I absolutely loathe the term, but it appears that PECOTA has a rather heavy dose of "regression toward the mean" built in. That explains the first three, and I guess with Myers it just assumes that 2003 was a fluke.

A sizeable decline for Kersh, and small declines for Cat, Sparky and A-Lo. Batista 2004 also forecasts lower than Escobar 2003.

Big gains for Hinske, Cash, Werth, and a sizeable gain for Woody.

Lilly/Hengten 2004 project to be a big improvement over Hendrickson/Lidle.

Small gains for Phelps, Hudson, and Towers.

Needless to say the bullpen projects to be significantly better.

I looked at the numbers again, and it's probably closer to 80 wins than 78, slightly higher if Werth gets more playing time. The Jays get killed in this projection because they predict that Delgado and Halladay won't have MVP caliber seasons, and those two were a big reason for the success of the Jays in 2003.

Cheers,

Mike
_WillRain - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 09:50 PM EST (#78886) #
On the other hand, the Jays were 15-21 v. the Rys, White Sox, and Rangers and in an average season, one might easily expect that we should have been over .500 collectivly against those teams given they had only two bothersome SP among them...that'd be 90 wins instead of 86 LAST year...barring major injury, it's not unrealistic in any sense to expect a minimum of 90 wins this year.
_A - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 10:01 PM EST (#78887) #
Sorry Kent, I must have misread your post because I had the impression you arranged to meet with him on Monday instead of posting your interview with him on Monday.
_Robbie Goldberg - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 10:11 PM EST (#78888) #
#143766 Posted 02/12/2004 09:50 PM by WillRain:

On the other hand, the Jays were 15-21 v. the Rys, White Sox, and Rangers and in an average season, one might easily expect that we should have been over .500 collectivly against those teams given they had only two bothersome SP among them...that'd be 90 wins instead of 86 LAST year...barring major injury, it's not unrealistic in any sense to expect a minimum of 90 wins this year.
------------------------------------------
It certainly isn't unreasonable for the Jays to win 90 games like you suggest, maybe even more, but I don't think you can look at records against specific teams and predict improvement based on those games you "should have won". Every year, the Jays will sometimes outperform teams that are better than them and have bad records against some weaker teams too. So this past year, the Jays happened to play the Red Sox and Yankees reasonably well but floundered against the Rays and Rangers. This may be coincidence or it may not be --- but the record as a whole is nonetheless indicative of the Jays performance last year and I don't think you can selectively discount their performance against certain teams as not being representative of this fact.
Joe - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 10:41 PM EST (#78889) #
http://me.woot.net
Halladay will not be regressing towards either his mean or the league mean any time soon. Particularly not the former; he is for all intents and purposes not the same pitcher who went 4-7 with a 10.64 ERA in 2000, but that season is weighing down his stats. It's true that as time goes on it will become less significant, but it's never going to disappear.

I will go on record now saying that Halladay isn't going to have a significantly worse season than last year. Delgado, on the other hand... harder to say.
Craig B - Thursday, February 12 2004 @ 11:08 PM EST (#78890) #
The rosy glow in here is blinding.

It's not that I disagree (I think the Jays will be a better team, too) but there is a HUGE amount of wishful thinking going on here. I am hoping to address some of that soon in a Jays season preview.
Pistol - Friday, February 13 2004 @ 12:00 AM EST (#78891) #
It's not that I disagree (I think the Jays will be a better team, too) but there is a HUGE amount of wishful thinking going on here

Everyone has hope in the winter/spring. It's a rule of being a fan.

Everything the Jays have done makes sense and appears to be an improvement, but my biggest concern is still the rotation. I could easily see Lilly, Hentgen and/or Towers pulling a Lidle this year. Batista is far from a sure thing as well.
_Domer - Friday, February 13 2004 @ 02:01 AM EST (#78892) #
Just a quick note...

The Toronto Blue Jays own the turf that SkyDome uses. That's why its up to Blue Jays to buy new turf. The SkyDome only owns the turf that the Argo's use.

This is 100% fact.
_AZ - Friday, February 13 2004 @ 07:54 AM EST (#78893) #
I'm thinking 83 wins for the Jays...I do hope I'm wrong and it's more like 93+ wins. A few reasons for that:

I don't think Delgado is going to have an MVP type season in 2004.

I think Halladay will slip a little (17-19 wins).

Wells might slip a little...

Myers will slip a lot...and I'm not sold on Cash at all.

We don't have a certifiable closer...That hurt us last year.

How will Batista adapt to the AL?

I think Hentgen and Towers will get belted around.

Lilly...I still have questions about him...

Can Reed Johnson continue to perform like he did last season?

Is Woodward a legitimate starting shortstop.

Can Hinske turn it around?

But, then again, everything may work out beautifully...I just have too many worries at this point.
Pistol - Friday, February 13 2004 @ 10:12 AM EST (#78894) #
We don't have a certifiable closer...That hurt us last year.

I don’t think a lack of a closer hurt the Jays as much as a lack of quality players in the bullpen last year. Maybe the Jays need 1 top reliever, but overall I think the bullpen has been upgraded considerably. I think in the worst case the Jays have 3 reliable relievers this year, where last year Lopez was about the only one above average.
Mike Green - Friday, February 13 2004 @ 11:09 AM EST (#78895) #
How about some love for Jason Kershner? Give him the ball every 2-3 days for about 2 innings, and he'll make you very, very happy. He makes a nice partner for Terry Adams, who can go 2 innings every 2-3 days when JK is not available.
_Dean - Friday, February 13 2004 @ 11:14 AM EST (#78896) #
I think lack of a closer did hurt the Jays. Not having someone there to shut the door meant teams always thought they could come back - and a lot did. Consider the Dodgers, their games were shortened to 8 innings if they had the lead and that had to weigh on the opposition at times. The Yankees are the same way with Rivera in their pen.
Pepper Moffatt - Friday, February 13 2004 @ 11:30 AM EST (#78897) #
http://economics.about.com
Consider the Dodgers, their games were shortened to 8 innings if they had the lead and that had to weigh on the opposition at times.

It was even stronger than that. Dodgers games were shortened to 7 innings, because they had Mota to pitch the 8th, and Mota was just as lights out as Gagne was.

If the Dodgers didn't have Mota and Quantrill in the pen, Gagne wouldn't have had all that many leads to protect. A bullpen is more than one guy, just like an offense is more than your cleanup hitter (unless you're the Giants).

Cheers,

Mike
_Dean - Friday, February 13 2004 @ 11:43 AM EST (#78898) #
I agree that a closer is a component of the bullpen. A solid bullpen like the Angels appear to have can take over the game from the starter & finish it off is very important in developing a contender.
_Matthew E - Friday, February 13 2004 @ 11:58 AM EST (#78899) #
I think lack of a closer did hurt the Jays. Not having someone there to shut the door meant teams always thought they could come back - and a lot did.

Not as many as you'd think. The Jays' save percentage was actually fairly respectable compared to all the other teams in the league. I don't offer this as proof that the bullpen was actually good, because really it was subpar, but I do say that there's a tendency to lose perspective when gauging the effectiveness of a bullpen. Some predictions:

- the Jays' bullpen will be, overall, quite decent this year. Not the best in the league, but certainly in the top half
- there won't be a dominant closer, though, and therefore
- there will be a public perception that the bullpen is still a weakness. Every blown save (and there will be some, because it happens to everyone) will bring more outrage, and the general high quality of the relief pitching will be forgotten.
Craig B - Friday, February 13 2004 @ 12:12 PM EST (#78900) #
I don't offer this as proof that the bullpen was actually good, because really it was subpar

Only as subpar as the starting rotation. The ERA of Jays relievers and Jays starters was exactly the same. For technical reasons, that means the starters were a touch better, but not in any significant way.
_Matthew E - Friday, February 13 2004 @ 12:18 PM EST (#78901) #
A difference between the bullpen and the starting rotation: A big part of the starters' ERA was due to Roy Halladay. Take him out of the rotation and take the best reliever - Lopez? - out of the bullpen, and recompare them, and then where are your ERAs? I haven't done this, but I presume that the bullpen ERA is suddenly way lower than the starters' ERA.

Shouldn't happen like that again this year.
Pepper Moffatt - Friday, February 13 2004 @ 12:22 PM EST (#78902) #
http://economics.about.com
Prospectus has the 2003 rotation ranked 18th overall, and the 2003 bullpen ranked 23rd overall. So they were pretty close to being equally as subpar, particularly when you take into account the "Roy Halladay Effect".

Cheers,

Mike
robertdudek - Friday, February 13 2004 @ 12:56 PM EST (#78903) #
Craig,

In the AL, starting pitchers' ERA was 0.41 (4.66 to 4.25) worse than relievers' ERA. It isn't only due to inherited runners, but also because it's much easier to pitch short stints in relief. This occurs even though the avreage relief pitcher is, in abstract, not as good a pitcher as the average starter.
robertdudek - Friday, February 13 2004 @ 12:58 PM EST (#78904) #
Further,

Since both Blue Jays starters and relievers posted 4.69 ERAs, that constitues a significant difference WRT the league figures in favour of the starters.
_JayFan0912 - Friday, February 13 2004 @ 01:38 PM EST (#78905) #
The biggest difference, the thing that separates the jays from the rest of the division is the farm system. If all goes according to plan we will improve in the middle of the year at C,OF, and pitching. The red sox, yanks, and orioles can't do that, and the rays are so far behind their prospects wont make a difference this year. We could add production equivalent to what the marlins got from pudge, cabrera, and willis (quiroz, rios, gross, and mcgowan/bush/peterson) at no charge.

Besides this, if injuries occur, we can either call up players to take their place or trade prospects for an upgrade. We also will have too many outfielders anyway ... rj, werth, rios, gross, cat .. is just too much. The yankees or sox can't just buy players, and have very few if any prospects at all.

When you consider the age of the jays as well, I can't see injuries as a huge problem. The yanks and sox don't have this insurance ... and they have old and injury plagued players on their rosters. Mussina is 35, Brown is 38 and injury prone, shef is 36, bernie/jeter were injured last year. For the sox, pedro can't seem to put a complete season together, and schil/wakefield/etc. are old, and they have a lot of contract year players on top of that. The sox and yanks don't have the flexibility we do.

If the jays get off to a good start, they have a great shot at sustaining the run throughout the season. If so, they will probably win the wild card.
_Matthew E - Friday, February 13 2004 @ 02:00 PM EST (#78906) #
JayFan0912: Both your points are valid, but the problem is that you can't rely on either of them actually having an effect in the season. Yes, the Jays have a better farm system than the teams they're competing with, but we don't know if any of those players are going to step up and play major league ball this year. Eventually some of 'em will, but we simply can't count on it this year. And yes, age and injuries will eventually take their toll on the Yankees and Red Sox, but we simply can't count on it having an effect this year.

When I look at the Jays I see a team that should, given ordinary amounts of good and bad luck, clear 90 wins. Tosca's 96-win-plus-playoffs goal I would categorize as 'extremely ambitious, but not entirely out of the question'. But it's the sort of thing you like to hear your manager say.
_JayFan0912 - Friday, February 13 2004 @ 02:22 PM EST (#78907) #
we simply can't count on it having an effect this year

Yes, I agree with you on this point... but having so many top prospects at AAA has to produce some results, eventually. The same can apply to minnesotta with joe mauer, and their rookie pitchers. Even if the prospects don't make the impact they can, they will certainly upgrade our roster. Rios, right now, is better than rj and quiroz can hit much better than cash.

If these guys don't make any contributions this year though, I don't think we will make the playoffs.
_Gabriel - Friday, February 13 2004 @ 05:12 PM EST (#78908) #
It should be close, I just don't think the Jays have it though. While the pitching all around should be better, the Jays can expect slightly worse offense. Really, apart from Hinske and Phelps, who has a good chance to get better? The Jays will get much less production out of C because Cash will play there a lot. I think it's a lot to expect Delgado to repeat his year last year. Hudson? Maybe a slight increase but I don't think he'll explode. I expect they'll get more out of Hinske but less out of Catalanotto and definitely Johnson which brings me to my major concern: Carlos Tosca. He's really a small-ball and defense guy on a team that shouldn't worry about that too much. The way he handled Phelps last year was horrible. He will play Reed Johnson and Kevin Cash way too often which kills the offense. Phelps needs to play everyday. He's a guy with a long swing so he'll always go through slumps, but he has 35-HR power and will be the 1Bman when/if Delgado cannot be re-signed. Personally, I think we saw Reed Johnson's upside last year. Fine offensive production from a middle infielder, but he's just not going to produce enough at RF. If it were up to Tosca, Huckaby would still be the #1 catcher.
_AZ - Saturday, February 14 2004 @ 09:27 AM EST (#78909) #
All this talk is getting me real hyped about spring training...

Bottom line, we know nothing...If we look back at all of our predictions in November I'm sure some of them will be correct, but many of them won't. I'm gonna love seeing how everything actually does pan out. Here's hoping for a great season from the Jays...

Good luck, boys! Play hard!
_jason - Saturday, February 14 2004 @ 03:58 PM EST (#78910) #
After years of reading predictions in those glossy type magazines (which, at one point had some value) here is my fearless prediction for the Jays coming season - feel free to insert any team name here.
Someone on the team will have a career year. Another player will be a disappointment. Someone will get injured. A weakness of the team as a whole - be it pitching, defence or offence - will be discoved and taken advantage of by the opposition. The best way to slot your starters (1,2...) is at the end of the season. While there is much more to say, lets leave it at that for a while. It is certainly much better than interpreting the entrails of some beasty, or the best guess of a predictive metric (oxymoron?) no matter how complex. Well thats a trifle harsh. I too enjoy them as a tool and a basis for an argument, but they are consistantly inconsistant.
cheers
jason
Tosca: Aiming For Playoffs | 90 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.