I liked this part....

Q - What are the hard facts that you had to learn about being a GM?

.....to see your name in the paper where someone's ripping you. You have to learn to take that. `Okay, this is part of the business.' And maybe knowing that someone's writing something that they don't have all the facts on, or whatever. You've got to be thick-skinned.

I wonder if Griffin got the stink eye from JP at this point. Did he squirm a little in his seat? Nah probably not.

Now if only RG had used an editor on his piece ... There, Their and They're.

Griffin describes J.P. as "relaxed but careful" -- who wouldn't be careful, if they were being interviewed by anyone from a paper with such a long history of antagonism toward them?

The question about "other GMs" being jealous of the way the Toronto public has accepted J.P. stems from something that Rich really doesn't seem to understand. The answer -- "Maybe they appreciate the honesty" -- applies to journalists as well as team executives, at least for this fan. I (we?) also appreciate intelligence, humour, and skill at one's craft. Ricciardi demonstrates all of the above, consistently. More columns like this, and fewer laden with innuendo and misinformation, would have earned Griffin the same respect. Instead, when we read his stuff, many of us are as wary as J.P. was during the interview.

The "god to young Fantasy Baseball fanatics" crack is a harmless nod to Bauxites, merely good-natured teasing. I know Rich didn't mean me -- I'm middle-aged -- but that's a lot more tolerable than his previous mean-spirited jabs at sabermetrics and SABR itself. Even the headline writer resisted the urge to ruin a good interview with a nasty, negative phrase. By itself, this isn't enough to end my boycott of the Star, but it's a step in a better direction.

The "god to young Fantasy Baseball fanatics" crack is a harmless nod to Bauxites

I like JP.

I like fantasy baseball.

These 2 statements are totally independant of each other, but writers frequently act as if they are totally related to one another.

There's nothing like a good dose of Roundup with your coffee.

Too bad about O-Dog's sore muscle, but there's no reason to rush him into action against the Tigers. They can start Gomez at 2B vs. righties and Berg vs. lefties until Hudson's 100%.

I like "Pondo" -- Delgado's name for Simon -- and was very encouraged to learn that Aquilino Lopez is getting more comfortable with his new arm slot and hasn't abandoned his new splitter yet. Some folks were awful quick to advocate farming him out, based on some experiments gone awry in spring training games.

http://economics.about.com
I like JP.

I like fantasy baseball.

These 2 statements are totally independant of each other, but writers frequently act as if they are totally related to one another.

The really stupid thing is, if JP used his current tactics in a traditional 5x5 roto league, he'd get killed.

The Ash era Jays were far more of a Roto team than the JP's squad could ever be. In Roto you don't have to worry about clubhouse chemistry, so you can carry guys who are complete headcases (Mondesi). You value guys that can steal a lot of bases (Otis Nixon), and you can punt OBP altogether (Alex Gonzalez). Guys who hit a lot of homers and collect a lot of RBIs (Carter and Sprague) are very valuable, even if they can't do anything else.

If there was ever a roto GM in big league baseball, it was Ash, not JP.

Cheers,

Mike

The really stupid thing is, if JP used his current tactics in a traditional 5x5 roto league, he'd get killed.

I thought that the reference Griffin used to "young Fantasy Baseball fanatics" was a reference to those who now use less traditional stats in their fantasy leagues, and not to the old 5x5 standard categories.

Or maybe I'm just giving him too much credit?

Sorry, but I must of been on holidays when this happened but how did the Jays manage to send Talley Haines to the minors. Did Tampa not want him back?

The Sean Douglass article brought back memories of those plastic milk bags. It's amazing how strange that seems now when you get used to milk jugs. I can only imagine someone seeing those for the first time and thinking 'what on earth is this?'

But what do I kno from 500 miles away- JFITWC

The Sean Douglass article brought back memories of those plastic milk bags. It's amazing how strange that seems now when you get used to milk jugs. I can only imagine someone seeing those for the first time and thinking 'what on earth is this?'

But what do I know from 500 miles away- JFITWC

Aquilino Lopez is getting more comfortable with his new arm slot and hasn't abandoned his new splitter yet. Some folks were awful quick to advocate farming him out, based on some experiments gone awry in spring training games.

Coach, this may have been me a while back. I don't know if I was advocating it per se, but it definitely makes sense to me. If Lopez was struggling to keep consistency with his new arm angle, but he still wanted to iron out the wrinkles, perhaps Syracuse might be the best ticket in order to raise his confidence a bit. Chulk is already on the 40-man and has a few options (if I'm not mistaken), so he could be flipped flopped with Lopez for a short period while Lopez gets his worked in.

I'm glad that Lopez is finding success with his new arm angle. I'd much rather him help the big club than take the bus trip down south.

Ahhhhh...OK Blue Jays on the PA system. Now that is music to my ears!!!

When I moved to Ontario I was also freaked out by the milk in plastic bags. I'd seen the stuff on the Tom Green Show but I thought the show put the milk in plastic bags to use as a prop.

Did anyone catch Baseball Prospectus Radio this morning? I slept in. Apparently Trace Ringolsby (a Denver based Griffin) and Michael Lewis were going to duke it out.

http://www.geocities.com/s_borisov/jb2004/ce006.html
From the Where are they now department ...

Pete Walker made an impressive start for Yokohama in his first game in Japan (COMN) on Friday:

Yokohama   W  L Sv GP   IP  H  R ER BB SO HR  BF    ERA
Walker     0  0  0  1  6.0  3  1  1  1  4  1  23   1.50

But his BayStars still lost 4-3 to the Yakult Swallows on Alex Ramirez' 3-run homer with two outs in the 8th inning.

I thought that the reference Griffin used to "young Fantasy Baseball fanatics" was a reference to those who now use less traditional stats in their fantasy leagues, and not to the old 5x5 standard categories.

Or maybe I'm just giving him too much credit?

Yes, way too much credit.

The reference he's making (at least my interpretation) is that both the Jays and fantasy baseball players like to make decisions based on numbers.

Did anyone catch Baseball Prospectus Radio this morning? I slept in. Apparently Trace Ringolsby (a Denver based Griffin) and Michael Lewis were going to duke it out.

I didn't. BP usually sets up an MP3 to listen to the show after the fact, so if you want to catch it you still can.

Baseball Prospectus Radio: You Only Think You Know Baseball

Last Week: It's a damn good show this week. Sure, I always say it's a good show, but this is really a good one. We're finishing up our season preview and getting ready for Opening Day with:

Omar Minaya - the Expos GM lets us know what it's like to put together a team and what he looks at when he evaluates players.

Fred McGriff - is he a future Hall of Famer? The "Crime Dog" gives BPR his full endorsement when he sits down with new BPR correspondent Mike Wilner.

Anyone else catch that?

Fred McGriff - is he a future Hall of Famer? The "Crime Dog" gives BPR his full endorsement when he sits down with new BPR correspondent Mike Wilner.

Wow. Congrats Mike - you deserve it!

ESPN Radio is reporting Al Leiter took a line drive to the head from Alex Gonzalez in this afternoon's game. Apparently he lost consciousness but eventually got up and wask taken off the field with a golf cart. No word from the club on the extent of his injury.

Steve's Selections (and other Jays-related tidbits):

- Nick Cafardo, Boston Globe, has a positively worded article on JP's Jays.

- The Globe & Mail and Toronto Star are both providing expanded Blue Jays preview sections this Monday

- Jeremy Sandler has two articles in today's Post, both requiring online subscription. There's a story on Reed Johnson, Toronto's leadoff hitter and "resident dirtbag," as well as another in the long line of "who's going to be the Jays Closer" articles. In this particular one, Ricciardi is quoted: "I think right now we'd probably go with Ligtenberg. He's had a good spring. He's refined his slider. He throws enough strikes. ..."

- Jason Arnold is continuing his promising spring, having pitched six scoreless innings yesterday for Syracuse (2 H, 5 K, 0 BB).

- Meanwhile, Aaron Hill shows why he's quickly becoming one of the Jays' top prospects, starting for AA New Hampshire in just his first professional season. Thanks to Union-Leader's Kevin Gray once again.

- The Charleston Alley Cats roster has been set, and there are few surprises. The starting rotation features four from last year's Auburn DoubleDays (Marcum, Mastny, James, and Core) in addition to hold-over Ramon Mora. Marcum's conversion to a starter, to go with Diaz' development, are some of the more intriguing things to track this year at Charleston. Thanks again to Jack Bogaczyk from the Daily Mail.

- Anyone want to speculate on Dunedin's rotation this year. My guess is that the opening day rotation will feature a fab five of: Banks, Vermilyea, Isenberg, Vermilyea, and Rosario.

- From the Off-Topic department, Carlos Delgado and Barry Zito will be featured in Under Armour's new tv ad campaign.

- And last but not least, Jim Bloom notified Cheek a few moments ago that there are only about 4,000 tickets left for Monday's opener. Ticket-holders are being told to get there early, to get there by public transportation, and to be in their seats by 12:45, when the lights dim, and the pre-game light-show/Fighting Jays intros, begin.

- 1 day, 21 hrs, 58 mins, 30 secs to go...

OUT!

Make that "a fab five of Banks, Vermilyea, Isenberg, Perkins, and Rosario." When Hanson, Harper, and Leonard are ready, it will become even more log-jammed in A/AA.

Thanks, Steve. I'll try to update our depth chart tomorrow morning; I'm at work now and have a fantasy draft tonight.

new BPR correspondent Mike Wilner

Congratulations! Maybe this will convince The FAN 590 to carry the show.

In a game that everyone wants to finish fast, Lurch has gone five strong innings in Florida and the Rays lead 5-1 -- Hentgen just gave up a HR to his first batter, Eduardo Perez.

Two guys that are conspicuous by the absence from both the AA ans AAA rosters are Matt Logan and Juan Campos - any idea what there status is?

Absolutely. Congratulations to Mike Wilner. That's a perfect marriage right there, both Prospectus and Wilner will benefit from that one.

Maybe this will convince The FAN 590 to carry the show.

Ya, really.

I have been led to understand, although not necessarily correctly, that the FAN wants to carry BP Radio, but there are certain international broadcasting restrictions that they have to contend with, so it might not happen for a while.

Congratulations to Mike Wilner also from me. Not that what he's doing now isn't worthwhile, but if anyone in the Toronto baseball media deserves a higher-profile job it's him.

Wilner's following the Shulman broadcasting path pretty nicely. Congratulations, Mike!

errr... Mazel Tov!

Wilner (who is DRIVING back from Florida?! What are they paying this guy?) called from the road to answer a few calls.

He made two comments of particular interest:

1. He can't believe that Rios won't be up by mid June. He makes a good point though - he can't see the 2005 team contending with two rooks in the order, let alone in the same outfield.

2. Miguel Batista needs to work on his rapport with the catchers. Wilner hinted that he has no gameplan going into games and doesn't take the mental preparation seriously.

Hopefully he gets on that, otherwise my fantasy season takes a serious hit.

Sorry, but I must of been on holidays when this happened but how did the Jays manage to send Talley Haines to the minors. Did Tampa not want him back?

The Jays worked out a deal with the Rays a few weeks back to keep him.

He can't believe that Rios won't be up by mid June. He makes a good point though - he can't see the 2005 team contending with two rooks in the order, let alone in the same outfield.

Although it's happened before. More or less.

Miguel Batista needs to work on his rapport with the catchers. Wilner hinted that he has no gameplan going into games and doesn't take the mental preparation seriously.

Wilner makes a good point, but I'm not sure how you mentally prepare for games when you have about eight pitches. The number of possibilities is overwhelming when you factor in number of pitches, number of possible counts, and number of batters' weaknesses.

And, to be fair to El Artista, even the best-made plans never survive contact with the enemy. There's no point in planning to pitch to Derek Jeter by throwing him sharp-breaking curve balls until you know whether your sharp-breaking curve ball is working that day. I think Batista is likely to struggle in the early innings in most of his starts until he's finished sorting through his arsenal for the day.

Nice point, Matthew E. Lynn and Rice were pretty special though.

I notice that Juan Peralta is on Charleston's roster, so Dean and Ryan01 were correct. Jermy Acey was not on Charleston's roster; what's doing with him? You wouldn't think that he'd skip to Dunedin. Maybe he'll play in Auburn this summer.

Tom Wilson signed a minor league contract with Oakland today.

Tom Wilson signed a minor league contract with Oakland today.

Certain players keep going around the same GM circles.

With all the talk about the Jays' great prospects, it makes me think about Ash and the old regime. Many of the prospects in the organization are products of the Ash regime. I don't think many here doubt that the "old" Jays knew talent, raw or whatever. It's just that I remember the organization got ripped for taking Rios in the same round for many of the same reasons as they got ripped for taking Vernon Wells in the first round. From my limited knowledge, the Brewers system has been touted as a top prospect system too...where Ash happens to be now. Is there something to this? While the guy never played the game, is there something to be said for having him in some prospect/scouting (!!) role? I know that the Jays' organization is headed in the Moneyball direction, but a part of me doesn't want to say goodbye to the traditional Blue Jay "A-Types," such as Moseby, Fernandez, Gruber and Wells.

I know I know...the same vein produced Campusano, Junior Felix, Ed Zosky and Manuel Lee. Ugh.

Just fodder for a Saturday.

Interesting comments about the Jays regarding my previous post in the BPR conversation with Ringolsby...I just heard them after writing the post.

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/radio/bpr_040403.mp3

Ash had very little to do with the level of talent that the system has produced. He relied heavily on the advice of his scouting department. Not that there's anything wrong with that if you're surrounding yourself with good people, and Ash had some of the best. The draft was run by the scouting department under guys like Tim Wilken and Chris Buckley. I highly doubt that Ash ever even saw Vernon Wells or Alex Rios before they were drafted. It's only been in recent years that GM's like Billy Beane, Sandy Alderson, Kevin Towers have started taking an active role in the draft. The Brewers have a top five draft pick seemingly every year. They darn well better have some good players.

Under the "high cieling HS player approach" the Blue Jays have enjoyed a great deal of success compared to a lot of other similar organizations. But there simply wasn't enough depth. The talent that did come out was top notch but the throughput was simply too low. Another approach needed to be tried. Will it work out better in the long run? No one really knows for sure. But at least they're making an effort instead of complacently sitting around doing things the same way just because that's the way they've always been done.

Jack Curry, New York Times, sings some more praises for the Jays. There have been plenty of metaphors used, of late, to describe the Jays' predicament in the AL East, but Curry adds a new one: "They are the other strong team in the formidable American League East and the other team trying for acclaim amid the endless skirmish between New York and Boston. That is like Elijah Wood trying to steal a scene from Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino."

Wow....great stuff here today. Thanks to Pistol and Steve for their roundups.

* I've said this before, but it never ceases to amuse me that inattentive minds think of both Beane and Ricciardi as statheads. They're both former players, they're both bright as hell, and they both have keen eyes for talent. How is this different from any other great GMs who are considered "traditional" and "established"? I think it was Hal McRae who once said that real progress will have been achieved when someone hires a black manager and no one even notices that he's black. I look forward to the day a young, smart, innovative GM can be hired without automatically being labelled a "fantasy god."

* The Boston Globe story refers to Ricciardi as a Beane "disciple." I'm not sure that's accurate; I think those guys were on a more equal footing than that in Oakland.

* Good to see Arnold having some early AAA success. The key to monitoring him this year will be his strikeouts: if his Ks can keep within shouting distance of his IP, he'll be getting close to the bigs. I don't think he'll ever be a big strikeout guy in the majors, but he can be effective nonetheless. I still think he'll be the first Skychief to arrive in Toronto this year.

* From what I can gather, Aaron Hill had one hell of a spring training this year; he impressed everyone with both his skills and his approach. Developmentally, he's already ahead of Russ Adams, who started his second pro season in High-A; Hill will be in Double-A to begin 2004. It's conceivable that both those guys could be in Toronto in 2005.

Ah, Wilson back with the A's. That is good news. I don't care how well Damian Miller handles the pitchers, he's a complete cipher on offense, and I'd love to see the team go with Wilson/Melhuse behind the dish. Throwing out potential base-stealers aside, is it that hard to catch Mulder, Hudson, and Zito?

HD and non-HD are separate channels in Canada too, e.g. on Rogers Digital Cable in Ottawa, 27 is Sportsnet Ontario (standard analog), 153 is Sportsnet Pacific (standard digital), 277 is Sportsnet HD (hi-def).

Sportsnet appears to produce their standard broadcast by just down-converting the wider HD picture with no chopping of the sides, so everybody gets the same 16:9 perspective (unlike, say, ESPN for its Sunday night games for which the standard broadcast is still the full 4:3; of course, ESPN is probably using different cameras rather than converting HD to standard, but I'm just guessing).

Last year, Sportsnet appeared to use a different graphic for the "bug" in the upper-left, but otherwise their HD graphics appeared to be stretched versions of the 4:3 graphics. There was no distracting ticker along the bottom during the HD broadcast (in standard, they used some of the black space at the bottom for the ticker; come to think of it, I think they changed the black bars on standard to a blue pattern at some point last September.) In Spring Training this year, I think they replaced the bug with a bar across the top like Fox uses.

My understanding is that HD is more useful on big screens (e.g. 61") than smaller ones. I just have a 36" 4:3 HD set, so for HD I get black bars across the top and bottom, and I find I have to sit very close to the TV to really appreciate the extra detail. When I sit my usual distance from the TV, I don't actually notice much difference (though if you switch back to standard, it looks awful for a while).

If you can't wait until Monday, on the Rogers HD Preview channel 280, I recently saw a few continuous minutes of highlights from an HD Yankees-Jays game from last September.

I think you can make a case for Beane being more of a stathead, whatever that means, but J.P.'s background is well-known: the guy was a scout for years. DePodesta is the numbers-cruncher/technocrat, whereas Beane and J.P. are more than that.

It's tiring to continually harp on the ignorance of the mass media and its writers, but sometimes it's so despicable you can't keep quiet.

even the best-made plans never survive contact with the enemy.

The thought of Napoleon or Hitler walking on to a battlefield and saying to one their comrads, "Hmm... I know what'll work, let's run at em' and throw stones. If that doesn't work i'm sure you guys can think of something." This is simply ludicris. A Pitchers game plan is vital to success. Pitchers don't just show up and throw the ball. The best ones, in my experience, know that mental preparation is as important as throwing.

There's no point in planning to pitch to Derek Jeter by throwing him sharp-breaking curve balls until you know whether your sharp-breaking curve ball is working that day.

If I'm pitching to Derek Jeter and my curve is off, i'll move to plan B and throw my deadly slider. The only reason I know to throw the slider is because I've used the tools that my team provides me. ie. scouts, video playback, stats, and coaching. These, when combined with good mental preparation, if done properly, will tell me before game time that my curve needs a little work and that my slider will make a much better out pitch.

In conclusion, the best starting pitchers of the last few years (Doc, The Rocket, Boomer, Pedro, Ortiz, Pettitte, the list goes on) all have been successful with the help of these THREE things:

1. The thought that a full, precise game plan has been developed and will only be altered because of one factor: the strike zone.

2. The catcher will always help you stick with said plan if trouble brews and you become destracted.

3. The best batters will almost ALWAYS beat the hardest throwing, full arsenal pitcher UNLESS a solid game plan is in place, knows how to work a count, and has faith in the tools that are provided to him. Basically, being mental prepared.

Batista knows this and hopefully he'll take a walk to Mental Preparation Station and hope on the number nine train to Create-A-Game-Plan Airport so he catch the next flight to Winsville.

I also must conclude that I am a loser and will try my best over the next few hours to get myself a life.

The Ash regime may have been great at finding talent, but I think at least part of the problem lay in developing it. The Devil Rays are a great example of this: As Ryan01 points out, when you've got a top five pick you'd bloody well better be signing some high-profile talent. I don't think you can argue that a guys like Baldelli, Crawford or eve Josh Hamilton are incredibly talented; the question lies in what they do with the talent.

With that in mind, I don't think it's coincidence that Jays' prospects who were talented but not seeing results -- like Rios & Quiroz -- began to blossom once the Ricciardi regime came in with particular plans for player development.

Not to pick on "bird droppings", but this Batista thing looks like it's about to get blown out of proportion hereabouts, much like the strange notion that Justin Miller has a future in Toronto.

In conclusion, the best starting pitchers of the last few years (Doc, The Rocket, Boomer, Pedro, Ortiz, Pettitte, the list goes on) all have been successful with the help of these THREE things:...

I'm curious to hear how you happen to know that these guys have been applying your 3-point plan, but regardless if it's hearsay or insider information, there's a rather critical problem with the logic. Consider the following stats from 2001 to 2003:

		IP	ERA 	ERA+	WHIP	K/BB	K/9	HR/9
Miguel	Batista	517.3	3.76	123	1.30	1.81	5.98	0.66
Russ	Ortiz	645.3	3.57	112	1.30	1.59	6.35	0.63
Ramon	Ortiz	606	4.40	103	1.36	1.89	5.81	1.38
David	Ortiz	0	0	-	0	-	0	0

Whichever Ortiz you're referring to, one of "the best starting pitchers of the last few years", he's clearly been inferior to Batista, unless Miguel is somehow to blame that the Diamondbacks didn't use him full time as a starter. I'm not buying that either, and if Batista is better than one of the best, he must also be one of the best. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I heard the original comment that Wilner made, and I didn't get "doesn't take the mental preparation seriously" from it at all. I think it's more a matter of Batista not being an easy guy for the catcher to work with because he can't spell out a plan ahead of time - like Dave Till said, he needs to sort through the arsenal and see which ones are working.

Not to pick on you Jonny. But I think you took my post a little out of context which is okay because i'm in a postin' mood tonight.

There is NO WAY Batista is even in the same class as Ortiz. Batista has never been the great starting pitcher that Ortiz is and I completely question how the stats you put up indicate other wise... ie. why such a small sample of Ortiz's career?

Batista has been thrown back and forth between five different teams bullpens and starting rotations. If that doesn't scream 'unreliable' then I don't know what does. I know he is a K machine and has great control as shown by his BB's but obviously something is missing or something has got to go because the man has STUNK numerous times over his career. Ortiz on the other hand, with the same up's and down's as any MLB pitcher, has obviously done something right, which I expect may have something to do with not trying to learn and throw seven types of pitches. Personally, I love pitchers. It's an underappreciated artform with much of the credit going to the pitchers instead the pitching coaches.

My three points (please don't be ignorant and think that I truly believe that these are the only things a pitcher needs) are usually repeated a few times from pitching book to book and are what I believe could be Batista's problems... catcher's can't control him, he's not comfortable with an ever changing strike zone with every new game, and due to his large arsenal has problems mentally preparing.

I think Batista knows what he's got to do to be better. Here he has yet another opportunity to change his mental awareness and take a step from medicore (underrated) to superb.

Just a quick note about out of context hoopla: I was simply pointing out what I feel a pitcher needs to be successful and that game plan is always in order. I wasn't posting in reply to Wilner or Batista. However, my posts do now represent what I believe must be done by Batista in order for this not to be a second coming of Cory Lidle; although I doubt that could happen and personally believe that Batista will serve to make us proud.

I think he may be referring to Russ Ortiz, not Ramon or David.

I recind my Ash comments. True enough, the Brew Crew better be producing talent given their draft position....however, it has been a hell of a long time with such a position and no real results!

Mike Green;
Little interesting to see Ryan Roberts and Mike Galloway start at Charleston as well, I'd figured them for Dunedin. And not only is Jermy Acey missing from the roster, but so too is Nick Thomas - who has a pretty big bat. Luke Hetherington I thought would have an outside shot at full-season ball, but will likely start in Auburn.
I suppose there might be some injuries at play that we don't know much about causing some of these ripples.

***ITALICS ON*** ie. why such a small sample of Ortiz's career? ***ITALICS OFF***(if only it were that simple :)
When talking about who IS a better pitcher, going more then 3 years back is not appropriate.

Regarding the minor-league pitching staffs ... I've been digging through the various media reports of the past few days, trying to figure out which pitchers will be appearing where, and in what capacity. This is what I've cobbled together, partly from reports and partly from my own math (this isn't a substitute for Gerry McDonald's terrific depth charts, of course; just a personal pre-season estimate):

Position   	Syracuse    	Manchester    	Dunedin      Chrston
Starter 1   	J Arnold*   	D McGowan*  	F Rosario*   	T Mastny*
Starter 2   	D Bush*     	C Reimers     	V Perkins*   	S Marcum*
Starter 3   	J Miller*    	P Ozias       	J Harper*  	J James*
Starter 4   	B Chen       	D Lee         	J Banks*     	R Mora
Starter 5   	C Baker      	G Chacin     	K Isenberg*  	D Core

Reliever 1  	B File        	A Peterson*   	J Vermilyea*  	B Reed*
Reliever 2	T Haines	B League*	B Buzachero*	D Romero*
Reliever 3	V Chulk		J DeJong*	J Maureau*	C Cheng*
Reliever 4	M Smith		J Frasor	C Pleiness*	F Romero*
Reliever 5	M Lukasiewicz	K Frederick	C Leonard*	M Sopko
Reliever 6	S Cassidy	D Jackson	D Nunley	M Sandoval
Reliever 7	D Maurer	J Ogiltree	C Talanoa	B Esarey
Reliever 8	J Matos		R Houston	I Ramirez	J Canizal

(The asterisks denote pitchers who I think would be reasonably considered major-league prospects at this point; as you can see, Dunedin appears to be loaded.) The relievers are listed in roughly the manner I think they’ll be used out of the pen, but that’s only a guess at this point. Indeed, there’s a lot of guesswork here: I would never have selected that rotation for Manchester, for example, but that’s what was reported in the most recent articles. There’s also the problem of the following pitchers who don’t have a home right now, but are also too advanced for the short-season leagues:

J Durocher
F Ozuna
S Valdez
T Thorpe
J Campos
C Kegley
A Torres

There’s also pitchers like Jeremy Harper and Chad Mulholland who seem to deserve a step up the ladder to full-season ball. I’ve probably missed some guys here and there who are injured (not just John Wesley and DJ Hanson), and maybe others who left the organization when I wasn’t looking; other opinions are welcome here. It’ll be interesting to see the opening-day rosters for these four clubs.

Regarding the move to put League in the bullpen: it certainly is surprising to see the club make the shift this early in the young man's career. But I suppose I can see the thinking behind it. Even if League gets command of his slider, he's still going to be just a two-pitch guy -- albeit two fabulous pitches. Dunedin's rotation is stacked, and League would have had a hard time breaking into it; at the same time, he's not at all ready for Double-A. The High-A pen may be just the place for him to work on perfecting his powerful but limited repertoire. Also, there's the fact that the Jays have a ton of good starting prospects, but not much in relief. Right now, I'd say Peterson and Vermilyea, and perhaps Davis Romero, are their only really promising bullpen prospects; adding League to that list would strengthen it considerably. If relief is League's future, and if he gets that slider figured out, then he's going to move up very, very fast.

Thanks for the chuckles, "bird droppings".

Batista has never been the great starting pitcher that Ortiz is and I completely question how the stats you put up indicate other wise... ie. why such a small sample of Ortiz's career?

First off, I used that sample size because you referred to "the last few years" - I'm playing by the guidelines you set out. I agree that it makes sense to look at this sample, as I'm mostly interested in what will happen in the upcoming season. Batista stunk out the joint in 65 innings 4 years ago, no doubt about it, but that tells me very close to nothing about how he'll do in 2004, and is outside the scope of "the last few years". Incidentally, Ortiz also stunk out the joint 4 years ago, and he did it in a lot more innings (195). As for how the stats indicate otherwise, you must be completely ignoring park factors.

Stat by stat: Russ has a big advantage in innings pitched - something that was out of Batista's hands as the Diamondbacks chose to use him as a swingman. Batista has an edge in K/BB. The WHIP for the two pitchers is identical, while ERA, K/9, and HR/9 appear to be slightly in Ortiz's favour. But the kicker, and I guess I should have specifically pointed this out, is that those numbers are not park adjusted. While Ortiz has spent 2 of the last 3 years in a severe pitcher's park (San Fran) and the other year in a mild pitcher's park (Atlanta), Batista spent all three years in a hitter's paradise. I'm confident that with the proper park factors applied all of these ratios would swing to significantly favour Batista. But we don't need to place any confidence in my speculation: what it all comes down to is preventing runs, and that's what ERA+ measures, adjusted for park. Whaddyaknow, Batista has been quite a bit better than Ortiz as measured by ERA+, 123 to 112 over the last 3 years.

Not happy with that? Convinced that data older than 3 years is relevant to the question of who is a better pitcher today? Insisting that Batista should be penalized for not throwing as many innings as Ortiz?

No problem. I present for you the Run Saved Above Average (RSAA) numbers for the two men in question. Be reminded that RSAA measures how many fewer runs a pitcher gives up than a league average pitcher would in the same number of innings, adjusted for park.

Year	Batista	Ortiz
1992	-1	(Minors)
1996	-2	(Minors)
1997	-5	(Minors)
1998	0	-9
1999	-2	7
2000	-26	-17
2001	20	16
2002	4	5
2003	27	8
Career	15	10

I can't think of a relevant way to slice that to show that Ortiz has been a better pitcher than Batista, and the only argument in his favour going forward is that he's 3 years younger. Career, peak, recent performance, they all say Miguel is better.

If you have some other measures you'd like to present to show the superiority of Ortiz, by all means, please do so. Theory and propaganda won't get it done.

Your deductive reasoning is good, Jordan! I would replace Harper with Vermilyea though. Harper has spent a full season at Dunedin, and his spot in the Fisher Cat rotation is being kept warm by Ozias/Lee/Reimers until he's ready to go. Harper was originally assigned to New Hampshire, but will stay at extended spring training while working through shoulder discomfort. IIRC, Dick Scott was quoted as wanting to try Vermilyea as a starter (despite Jamie's stated preference for relieving).

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1774921
The Mets found a way to free themselves of Roger Cendo's insanely large contract. They've shipped him to St. Louis in exchange for Chris Widger and Wilson Delgado plus financial considerations. If Cendo can find his 1999 season again this could really help the Red Birds but alas, that just doesn't seem to be in the cards.

the best-made plans never survive contact with the enemy

Leave it to Dave Till to quote Dwight Eisenhower in a pitching discussion. Nice one...

Ash had very little to do with the level of talent that the system has produced. He relied heavily on the advice of his scouting department.

Well, what the c*ap was he supposed to do? Ignore their advice? Do you think Ricciardi ignores the advice of his scouts?

People have played this kind of game before. Pick a GM, blame them for everything that went wrong and credit everything that went right to someone else in the organisation.

From the outside, it only makes sense to talk about the Ash regime and the Ricciardi regime as a collective and tote up their successes and failures. The top person is ultimately held accountable and at the same time is largely reliant on the people that work for him. And that goes as much for Ricciardi as for Ash.

"There is NO WAY Batista is even in the same class as Ortiz."

Forgive me, but this is just stupid. Either that or you are referring to some Ortiz in an alternate universe that has been putting up Hall of Fame numbers.

The stats presented are extremely relevant and are from the LAST THREE YEARS INCLUSIVE. Before that you might as well be talking about completely different pitchers because their abilities can change a lot in the span of four years.

Why don't we wait until Batista actually PITCHES IN A REGULAR SEASON GAME with Toronto before jumping all over him and proclaiming him the next Lidle. Sheesh.

Are you all kidding me?!? First off, honestly, this shouldn't even be an argument. I love Batista and would love to seem him succeed in Toronto. That's priority number one.

Now...

1. Thanks for the chuckles, "bird droppings".

The fact is that in the last three years Ortiz and Batista have both belonged to contending teams... to say that one statistic like RSAA indicates how great a pitcher is just ridiculous. According to you all major league teams now just have to look up a pitchers RSAA and sign him accordingly!

As far as stats AND pure balls (the kind you guys lack) are concerned, Ortiz is a proven winning pitcher. Batista can take a hike. We wouldn't be having this argument if Batista wasn't a Blue Jay and just because of that simple fact I won't respond any more of your silly statistical bull. It really all comes down to Ortiz being a PROVEN WINNER and Batista being a HUGE QUESTION MARK. You say that Batista's stats take a pounding over innings pitched because he was a swingman? Since when do great pitchers like Batista serve as swingmen for 5 of 7 years of their careers and crappy pitchers like Ortiz serve as starters for, what's this? 5 of 6 seasons... and go 84-47? Ortiz must be terrible.

Remember that statistical ignorance is a virtue. However, I'm obvously blind to your points and must admit I'm willin' to learn so anytime you wanna sit me down and show me why Ortiz sucks... I'm 100% game.

Forgive me, but this is just stupid.

So, I'm stupid?

Anyways, I never once said Ortiz was a hall of famer.... he's simply a name I thought of at that time whom I, read 'I' as in me, THINK is better then Batista and has proven himself as a winner over his entire five seasons as a major league starter. Statisics can say whatever you want them too but a winner is still a winner no matter what stupid facts you throw at me. Bobby Cox is obviously an idiot for naming Ortiz the Braves opening day starter.

As for claiming El Artista the next Lidle... I pray every night that Batista proves every bit as good as everyone thinks and statistically says he should be... if you guys are simply saying I should stop praying because he's going win then I'm fine with that. However, if that's not that case and you wanna sit down at a beer club meeting or game and show me exactly why I'd want Batista on my fantasy team over Russ Ortiz then I'm game.

Bird Droppings, it seems as though you've determined wins as the statistic of value, whereas the statistical analysis that you tend to reject ignores wins when comparing one pitcher to another. The reason more complex statistics are important in this situation is that we aren't looking for Batista's value in relation to the D-Backs or Ortiz' value in relation to the Braves, we want the quality of the pitcher. Granted almost all statistics are scewed on some level due to the quality of the team the player plays for, the statistic most overtly scewed beyond any doubt is wins (a pitcher could throw a one-hit game, and lose 1-0).

In terms of your fantasy team, Ortiz may be the better selection because fantasy baseball values wins. The moral of the story? When looking for a fantasy pitcher, pick one on a good team because that team will produce the wins for him. However, if you're the GM for a living, breathing team and you need to find the pitcher who will best service your club, wins should be, for all intensive purposes, be ignored.

Well, what the c*ap was he supposed to do? Ignore their advice? Do you think Ricciardi ignores the advice of his scouts?

Of course not, I'm sure Ricciardi still relies heavily on his scouts. But I don't doubt that in some cases he disagrees with them, and in the end he has the final say.

I was not bashing Gord Ash. I simply meant to point out that his responsibility revolved around the major league team. In that capacity, I think Ash made some solid moves and he made some bad ones and that's what he should be evaluated on. Not on things that he had very little to do with such as the draft.

Ricciardi on the other hand is involved in a much wider scope of operations within the organization. He takes part in nearly every aspect of the teams operations. I think ultimately, he will (and should) except more credit for the team's success and more responsibility for it's failings.

PS. I think Ryan Day makes a great point about the people Ricciardi has brought in having a positive effect on player development in the minors.

I think that Batista's eight innings of scoreless ball in the 2001 World Series speak to his ability to pitch well in big games.

Curiously enough, a very good comparison for Batista in one regard is Kelvim Escobar. I've been annoyed all offseason by BP's harping on Escobar as a guy who's been unable to hold down a role for a full season. After watching him pitch in multiple roles over the last few years, I will say that the problem wasn't with Escobar himself. If he'd been left in the rotation from 2001 onwards, he would have been a much more valuable pitcher, and it's not his fault that that didn't happen. The same is true for Batista.

Steve, I suspect you're right: Harper doesn't have anything left to prove at A-Ball, and the clock is ticking on him. He may start in Dunedin's warm weather, but he should certainly be in the Eastern League very soon after that.

If my estimate is accurate, then there are relatively few top pitching prospects in the upper minors. With Arnold and Miller likely to spend at least a month or two in Toronto, Syracuse may find itself particularly low on pitching, though the offence should he loaded. On the other hand, I fully expect to see McGowan in Syracuse no later than June, and Peterson perhaps before that. The wild card is Rosario; if he finds his command, he'll be on the express elevator. Keep an eye on Vermilyea, too.

According to you all major league teams now just have to look up a pitchers RSAA and sign him accordingly!

That, Mr. Droppings, would be a huge step in the right direction for many clubs.

Droppings:

Not to be rude, but what you have done is the equivalent of walking into the lion's den and proclaiming "Derek Jeter is clutch!" in a triumphant voice. I think A's response is probably the most logical way to think about comparing two pitchers in different situations.

http://economics.about.com
AND pure balls (the kind you guys lack) are concerned, Ortiz is a proven winning pitcher.

Pure balls? Ortiz plays a game for a living and makes millions of dollars for doing so, he's not fighting against a heavily fortified German Fourth Army in the 3rd Battle of Ypres.

There is only one pitcher that I can think of off the top of my head where wins actually was the statistic that really defined the pitcher and that was Jack Morris. All he wanted was the win, if the score was 8-0 then Jack could throw strikes and allow 4 runs which hurt his other numbers but he got the win. If it was a tight game then Jack would throw a shut out. He has some of the worst ERA+ numbers I have seen for a guy who won over 250 games in his career. Russ Ortiz is nowhere near Jack Morris and Miguel Batista's role in Arizona was a product of the team more then his ability. Lets see what he can do now in a defined role over the course of the season.

http://www.stathead.com/bbeng/spira/pitchtoscore.htm
Jack Morris's Win-Loss record was a product of run support, which he had a lot of over his career. Greg Spira wrote an article several years ago on pitching to the score (COMN) and Morris was one of the people he looked at. Morris during his entire career only racked up four additional wins compared to his projected Win-Loss record based on the run support he received.

Ryan, thanks for the link very interesting article.

Honestly, I'm not ignoring anything that anyone puts in front of me and love surfing this forum. So I apoligize if anything I may have said offended anyone at this point and would like to make it clear that i'm never attacking anyone with my posts and that my posts are all meant to be taken lightly. I can just picture you guys at home wanting to just reach through your monitors and grab me and say "Listen Kid... It's all right here! Just read it..."

Anyways...

In short, I feel that statistics do not tell the story of El Artista. I've seen a new light on Batista by being exposed to stats that I would have otherwise ignored. I also believe that the two pitchers statistically are close enough that I took it upon myself to bring in other, less tangible evidence (that I may be completely wrong about).

Batista is a mighty fine pitcher and when I look above and see that I said "There is NO WAY Batista is even in the same class as Ortiz," I realize I was being ignorant and I agree that Ortiz and Batista are probably only seperated in terms of overall value by seven or eight pitchers. The fact remains that at this point of the season Ortiz is reliable for a win and El Artista, as according to recent reports, is a question mark. What Batista does have is an uncanny ability to pitch in the playoffs and in a championship run. When it comes to the post-season the man is a gamer. I look forward to seeing him on the mound in October.

Does any one know why Batista bounced back and forth? I made the assumption that this was the Diamondback's decision and could have been because of unreliable stuff on occassional outings. Again, a similar situtation to Escobar.

Just a quick note...

Again, I never hailed Batista the next Cory Lidle. I just hope that everything works out for Batista and doesn't turn ugly. Answer me this... Am I wrong to have the understanding that this is going to be a banner year for Batista and this is suppose to be the season that makes or breaks him as a full time starter?

I went and looked up the run support figures for Russ Ortiz and Miguel Batista from the last three years. Ortiz has clearly had the advantage in that department, making it unsurprising he's had more wins than Batista over that span:

Russ Ortiz
Year - Runs Per Game (rank in NL)
2003 - 6.49 (4th)
2002 - 5.37 (11th)
2001 - 5.72 (11th)

Miguel Batista
Year - Runs Per Game (rank in NL)
2003 - 4.89 (25th)
2002 - 4.68 (27th)
2001 - 5.56 (not qualified)

These numbers don't take park effects into account, either. In reality, Ortiz's run support was even better than the numbers indicate and Batista's was worse.

BD, no need to apologize; discussion is what this forum is all about.

I realize that you hadn't meant to get into a discussion about the relative merits of Russ Ortiz and Miguel Batista, but FWIW, BP's numbers put them pretty close to one another:

Russ Ortiz

Year  GS   IP   SNPct  SNVA  SNWAR
2001  33  218.2  .598   2.1  4.1
2002  32  189.2  .444  -1.3  0.4
2003  34  212.1  .562   1.5  3.2
Total 99  620.2  .536   2.3  7.7

Miguel Batista

Year  GS   IP   SNPct  SNVA  SNWAR
2001  18   96.1  .580   0.8  1.7
2002  29  176.2  .490  -0.3  1.3
2003  29  181.1  .621   2.1  3.8
Total 76  454.1  .561   2.6  6.8

The thing that jumps out at me here is that Batista has pretty much been a full-time starter since 2002.

Batista's 10-9 record last year is pretty good if you consider that his team placed 10th in the NL in runs despite playing in a bandbox. Here are a few more W-L records from that team:

Pitcher          W-L
Brandon Webb    10-9
Curt Schilling   8-9
Randy Johnson    6-8

John