After his performance this year, who do you think will make more money in 2005: Derek Lowe or Nick Lowe?

I didn't know the Star had gone to a registration format. Boo.

The genesis of radio station CUTL is found in last night's minor league thread. It plays all cuttlefish all the time.

Orlando Cabrera? Another starter? What are your thoughts?

Cabrera strikes me as a slightly better version of Alex Gonzalez, not much more. He had a nice 2003 (800 OPS) and an overrated 2001 (almost 100 RBI) but will enter 2005 as a 30-year old with a career OPS in the 720-range.

Let the Cubs overpay for him.

I'd like to thank Craig and everyone else that gave me suggestions for the Expos game and Montreal, we had a great time.

I was amazed at how loud the fans in Montreal were. There were half the fans but twice as much noise (vs. Toronto).

And whoever's in charge of the music at Skydome could take some serious lessons from Montreal. There was still lots of music and stuff in Montreal, but it wasn't overly loud (that was left up to the fans), and it was designed to get the fans to participate with it, not drown them out. (ie, the Ole Ole Ole Ole song).

I'd highly recommend that anyone who hasn't been to an Expos game try to make it to one this year.

As for Blair's article, I'd rather seen Jose Valentin than Cabrera, because I think you could get him to sign a shorter term deal, due to his age. Sign him to a 2 year deal, and he can be the starting SS next year, then the year after that he can rotate between SS and DH.

I've seen alot of suggestions that the Jays should sign a starting pitcher this offseason, and I'm not sure I see the reason for that. For those of you that advocate signing a pitcher, what's the logic on spending the money on a starting pitcher as opposed to a DH/1B/SS?

Nick Lowe, really?

In today's print edition of the Toronto Star, there is a nice story about the induction of Paul Molitor and Dennis Eckersley. Eckersley gave an emotional speech about his career and his recovery from alchohol abuse; it was particularly touching because of Molitor's own substance abuse issues in his career.

For those of you that advocate signing a pitcher, what's the logic on spending the money on a starting pitcher as opposed to a DH/1B/SS?

Why not do both?

can someone fill me in on all the cuttlefish jokes? i've only been keeping up with battersbox for a short while.

I was thinking that Orlando Cabrera might be a good fit here aswell. Sign him to a 1 year deal, so he can improve his numbers, as this past year he has been somewhat delgado like in numbers. He is a better than average defensive shortstop, who could make the rotation look better than it is. Having a vacuum on both sides of second would be nice.

There's no real logic behind it. It's just a reference that went way out of control, and now it seems to pop-up everywhere.

Here's a picture of a cuttlefish:



That should go to Spicol, who correctly identified the singer of today's song as Nick Lowe. The song was "Cruel to be Kind".

I'd say the chances of the Jays signing Orlando Cabrera are somewhere between slim and none. Other than 2003, his career has been eerily similar to one Alex S. Gonzalez. Not to mention Cabrera's 2004 salary, according to ESPN, is $6.0 million. Don't see Ricciardi forking over that much or more for a defensive SS. I'd be very surprised if Russ Adams is not the starting SS next year.

As for the starter, Ricciardi was hot after Russ Ortiz a few years ago (but SF didn't want to trade him for Jose Cruz), so that could be an option, though an option with a big price tag.

I'd personally spend a good portion of the available money on a #2 starter. The market will have a few of those calibre pitchers available in the off-season (Clement, Ortiz, Morris). It'll put less pressure on the bullpen, and help off-set the production loss from Delgado (typical Delgado, not 2004-Delgado). We're pretty much set position player-wise anyway, add Adams at short, Gross in the OF, and sign a cheap 1B or 1B platoon (Cat and a righty seems to be the realistic option at this point).

Since I blanked on the song title, I'm donating my picture of a cuttlefish to the Salvation Army.

Why not do both?

Fair enough. It just seems to me that the pitching seems pretty much set for next year, and unless you can get a Clement type pitcher, I don't see that you'll get much improvement from a starter. I think the team needs a power hitter more than another starting pitcher.

If the Jays do sign another 2/3 type guy, that'd be a big improvement on Towers or Miller. Plus we can't assume that all our starters will be healthy all the time. Never hurts to have depth, which another starting pitcher would greatly provide.

I can't see the Jays signing Cabrera either. Some team will overpay greatly for him.

If Bush really has arrived, then he, Lilly, Bautista and Doc are a strong enough starting 4. Between Miller, Towers and some NRIs, the #5 slot should be OK. Spend the money on some hitting.

Is it just me, or does Russ Adams not inspire confidence? Attitude is great, but if you can't slug .400 at AAA you're probably not going to be worth much in the majors. He hasn't shown any stolen base potential, and isn't walking enough to offset the lack of power.

Not to beat what has become a dead horse, but the Jays need Josh Phelps. He should be playing every day- he's the only player in the organization right now other than Wells (and Carlos, but he's gone) with 40-HR potential. He may look pretty far from that now, but it was there at one point, and they need to see if it can come back.

If Phelps looks done, they need to bring in some NRIs with power potential, lightning-in-a-bottle types. Travis Lee has been hurt all year and will be dirt cheap (I think he signed 1-year with NYY?). Best case would be for Gross to suddenly develop serious power, but it just isn't happening. The '05 draft should be mainly hitters with good power, hopefully with Hill/Adams, JP's got his fill of weak-hitting college middle infielders...

I had a nice view of the game yesterday behind the first base dugout.
Bush looked really impressive. He was rattled and he pitched very well without his best stuff. His breaking pitch didn't have as good of a break as it usually does, but he was able to spot all his pitches and throw strike after strike.
Delgado's home run was also impressive, as he was out on his front foot when he made contact with Zambrano's pitch. Zambrano wasn't particularly sharp, but his pitches had good movement. The Jays were able, for the most part, to stay back and take good hacks.
Ligtenberg also looks like his old self. Obviously his time on the DL did wonders.
In the field, O Dog had an error on a backhand play but he made about three other great plays before that.
Rios is looking better in the field, although he only made a couple plays.
On the DRays side, it was nice to see Joey Gathright take time after batting practice to sign autographs for fans on the first base side. He was the only player to take time to do so and made sure everyone who wanted one, got one. Rocco told a young fan he had "somewhere else to be." Former Jays Cruz and Hendrickson also turned down invitations to sign autographs.

I still don't think the Jays are burying Phelps. His swing still looks like a work in progress.

I don't think pursuing Cabrera is a good idea (not sure if it's Blair's idea or J.P. told him that's what he wants to do). Cabrera is a good defensive shortstop when healthy but he's not that great a hitter. The upgrade over some combination of Woodward/Adams and a scrapheap veteran isn't all that much.

Assuming Delgado is elsewhere - 1B/DH is the spot where a big bat is needed, or else the Jays will very likely find themselves near the bottom of the pile in homeruns again.

It is really hard to get a good read on what to expect from Rios- not much to go at higher levels. Any guesses on his power potential?

SS: Kaz Mat might be available after '04- the Mets are moving him to 2B, and he probably won't be happy about it. His defense has been weak this year, but that mostly come from playing on grass and not having the arm to compensate for it. With the Jays, he'd be back on turf. He's expensive, and if he keeps hitting like he's been lately, they won't be trying to dump him. But if the Mets would be interested in picking up part of his salary to avoid a clubhouse problem, he'd be worth it.

On the DRays side, it was nice to see Joey Gathright take time after batting practice to sign autographs for fans on the first base side.

On Friday when the Jays were up for batting practice, it was great to see how many of them went to sign autographs. But the real standout was Orlando Hudson -- every single time he went in or out of the dugout he paused to sign more for the kids who kept gathering there. On top of that, he was asking them who else they really wanted to get autographs from, and then he was going over to the other players and letting them know. It was really neat to see.

Is it just me, or does Russ Adams not inspire confidence? Attitude is great, but if you can't slug .400 at AAA you're probably not going to be worth much in the majors. He hasn't shown any stolen base potential, and isn't walking enough to offset the lack of power.

I agree. I have long advocated on the Fanhome board to trade Adams (to Oakland or LA, ironically both could use MI help) and find a full-time SS from outside the organization. Unfortunately, that doesn't appear to be realistic for the time being. For now, he's a cheap SS option, and barring a splurge to sign Nomar Garciaparra, he's probably the best we can do (financially more so than productivity).

I'd really be more comfortable if we had the luxury of bumping Batista, Lilly, and Bush down a spot in the rotation. As much as I like some of the arms in our system (Banks, Rosario, Vermilyea, Marcum, etc), I don't see a top of the rotation pitcher anywhere there now that McGowan is out until 2006. It would be better to fill that #2 spot outside the organization, IMO, and if we throw a little less than what we're willing to give Carlos to one of Clement, Morris, or Ortiz, there could be a match there. We're not going to sign a big time hitter, and our farm system is drying up on hitters now that Rios, Gross, Quiroz, etc, are either up or close to being up.

I agree with "dp" 100%. We'll probably have a pretty good 1st round pick next year, so get the best hitter available preferably with power potential, whether he's from high school, college, or Guam (welcome John Hattig).

Barring injury, the rotation is set for next year. I think it will be one of the best rotations in the major leagues.

It is really hard to get a good read on what to expect from Rios- not much to go at higher levels. Any guesses on his power potential?

More Friday batting practice info: Rios put a number of balls in the bullpen and in the first deck outfield seats, so he can do it.

So we all see Miller as the #5 starting next year?

I wouldn't be too worried about Rios' power potential at this point. It's nice to see him concentrating on making solid contact, which he's doing in spades, and keeping that average at a more than respectable level.

Cabrera would be a waste of money. The Jays don't need him for more than a year and he will get a multi-year offer from other teams. There is no way he'll sign here unless the Jays offer a three year deal, which would be silly. Plus he has a history of back (disk) problems, which normally only get worse with age.

I have long advocated on the Fanhome board to trade Adams (to Oakland or LA, ironically both could use MI help)

LA has a gold glove guy we gave them hitting .300 (an empty .300, but better than Adams at AAA). At 2B, Alex Cora has also hit above his head at .299/.388/.418. Backing them up is Jose Hernandez- .294/.387/.487. Basically, 2 of their 3 middle infielders are hitting better than Shawn Green.

In retrospect, the decision to give up Izturis looks like a mistake because it created the need to draft Adams/Hill. JP could've elected to go with defense at SS and fill the offensive void with strong hitters at other positions. He couldn't have anticipated the lack of development (regression?) by Felipe Lopez, so it wouldn't really be fair to hold him accountable for this, but it wouldn't have hurt to hold Izturis as insurance in AAA, especially considering the guy he got back was a dud. Izzy was rushed Ash, so I think wound up looking worse than he actually was. Still, at 21, he hit .290 in AAA. I think it would've been worth giving him a year there to refine his offensive skills. Mike Young developed after looking like a loser for years; it isn't like Izturis would've been the first...

I agree with "dp" 100%.

Wow, that never happens here :>

I'm comfortable with Miller as a 5th statter.

NFH it's good to hear that Rios hits HR's in batting practice. He hit 22 between AA and winter ball last year and I don't think they were all inside the park HR's.

Don't count out McGowan for next year. The worst case scenario is 2006 but I'd be disappointed if it was that long. The Jays always put a worst case scenario spin on things so we don't get our hopes up.

So we all see Miller as the #5 starting next year?

Depends on how he pitches after/if he comes back. But they have enough space for him and Towers in the rotation this year, so they can battle it out. How about a "platoon" where you mix them against the offenses their best suited for? You don't see this much, but the Jays seem smart enough to at least be open to it.

I would go with another starting pitcher. Doc, Batista, the Flower, along with another 2/3 guy would allow Bush, Miller, Towers to fight over #5. We have to expect that there will be injuries and slumps. We could keep Towers at the 'cuse and have one of Miller/ Bush as the swingman. JP also needs to pick up about 3 starters for Syracuse.

As for DH I would platton Cat/ Phelps and go out and get a 1B. Assuming we will have 10-12 Million. We could get a starter for 5-6 million and a 1B for 5-6 Million.

If Gross is able to throw you would have Gross/Wells/Rios/Reed/ occassional Cat in the OF. SS is the only hole in the infield. I would be fine with some combo of Gomez, Adams, Menechino. Maybe you could shift the O Dog to SS over the winter as he has the arm and range. If you have some money you could get more of a slugger at 2B.

LA has a gold glove guy we gave them hitting .300 (an empty .300, but better than Adams at AAA). At 2B, Alex Cora has also hit above his head at .299/.388/.418. Backing them up is Jose Hernandez- .294/.387/.487. Basically, 2 of their 3 middle infielders are hitting better than Shawn Green.

Keep in mind though that Paul DePodesta (i.e. Ricciardi/Beane clone) is LA's GM. I wouldn't be surprised if he traded Izturis or Cora while their value was high, assuming he had a better or similar alternative. I don't think it's off-base to say Izturis and Cora are overachieving just a tad.

I'm not saying they have a pressing need for a middle infielder, it really depends on how DePo sees Izturis and Cora as future players. I think it's safe to say he'll value a player like Adams, since he, Ricciardi, and Beane seem to share brains most of the time.

Izturis was definitely traded to fill a hole (SP) due to the fact that they presumably had a better SS prospect already on the roster. I'm scratching my head more on the Lopez deal than the Izturis deal.

With the Lopez deal I think its fairly simple. JP felt that Lopez was overhyped, and his performance hadn't lived up his reputation up that point, nor was it likely to in the future. I believe Lopez was also considered lazy in the clubhouse, and they didn't like the fact he followed Mondesi around. JP was quite high on Arnold and Griffin, and was able to make the deal.

Don't forget Griffin was a first-round pick by the Yankees that nearly everyone said was a great low first-round pick. I remember Sickels giving him quiet a high grade in his draft review that fall, saying that he should do nothing but hit.

I'm not saying you're wrong about Cora, but this year isn't totally without precedent. Cora 2002, pretty much the same line as '04, about the number of AB:
284 PA .291/.371/.434/.805

In my mind, Adams is decidely inferior to Izturis. I don't know how Adams looks on defense, but there was talk of him not being able to handle the position. Izzy's an established upper-tier defensive SS who at 24 looks like he may have developed into an average hitter for a SS. Adams, a year younger, has shown good plate discipline, but not much else at AAA. At 21, Izzy hit .290 there. I'm not sure who'll turn out better long-term (keep in mind DePo's mysterious system for evaluating defense), but LA's contending right now, and Izzy will be worth more than Adams for the remainder of '04. When a guy's 24, it is tough to say if he's overachieving or if he's improved. Izzy has increased his BB rate (25 in 413 vs 25 in 583), cut down on his strikeouts, and hit for a little more power. I've only seen him a couple of times this year, but he looks like he has a plan at the plate, maybe he's maximized his limited ability. Plus he plays in a pitcher's park- road numbers .323.367/.435- which distorts his ability. That's the thing with annointed defensive wizards- they get playing time to learn, and sometimes develop (again, Mike Young).

In retrospect, the decision to give up Izturis looks like a mistake because it created the need to draft Adams/Hill.

The problem with this theory is that Hill, at least, wasn't drafted based on need. He was drafted as the best player available. I'm not sure that Adams was the same, but that's what the front office says and we should at least acknowledge that.

I think it's likely that even with Izturis in the organization, Adams and Hill both still would have been drafted. I also think it's staggeringly unlikely that Izturis would have played if he had been in Toronto the last two (now three) years. He was *so* bad with the bat that there is little chance he would have been able to play in front of Woodward - or even Lopez.

The fact that Izturis is playing reasonably well now isn't the issue. There's still 2002 and 2003 to consider.

I'm scratching my head more on the Lopez deal than the Izturis deal.

I'm pretty confident that Lopez will never have more trade value than he did that winter. The fact that the return on Lopez has (to date) been uninspiring shouldn't blind us to the fact that the trigger was pulled at the right time. Even in hindsight, it was a good decision to trade Lopez; it wasn't much of a decision to get what the team got.

I also think it's staggeringly unlikely that Izturis would have played if he had been in Toronto the last two (now three) years. He was *so* bad with the bat that there is little chance he would have been able to play in front of Woodward - or even Lopez.

Like Lopez, he was rushed, at the time IIRC to make Alex Gonzalez (still a miracle that JP got out from under that contract) feel like Toronto had options at SS. I think, based on his AAA numbers, that the promotion to the majors hurt Izzy just like it hurt Lopez- they both had a lot to learn at the minor league level. In 1999, at 19, Izzy hit .308/337/.422 at Dunedin, and stole a lot of bases, albeit at a low percentage. He skipped AA and had a miserable season in Syracuse at age 20. So it is worth remembering that he showed offensive promise at one point. Put Russ Adams at Syracuse when he's 20- I doubt he hits .150. I think had both players been developed under the JP regime, things would've worked out much different. I don't think Izzy had any business being in the majors in 2002; what I'm saying is he may have been helped a lot by another season at AAA. Maybe not. After watching both Izzy and Lopez be promoted too aggressively, I was a little worried about the Rios callup, but fortunately it has worked out very well.

Anyway, instead of re-fighting battles from three years ago, we should talk about the fact that about one week after one of those jackanapeses at the Sun/Star (I lose track these days of whether it's Frick or Frack running the team down) said the season would turn into a battle for fourth place, the Jays are two games out of third.

Didn't realize there was a battle going on...

August is gonna be tough- lots of games vs Yankees and Red Sox, but balanced by a bunch with O's, DRays.

Anyone in the NYC area interested in the Monday Aug 9 day game at Yankee stadium?

Michael Young was more than a defensive wizard. TheBaseballCube doesn't show his OBP's for some reason, but he hit .291 and slugged .461 in AAA (age 24) and hit .319 with a .457 SLG a year before that in AA. He had offensive talent combined with defensive talent. Playing in Texas (in that park) has definitely helped him offensively (from '01-'03, his road OPS was .642, this year's it's .809), but his development shouldn't be a total surprise. If you meant he played everyday in Texas because of his defense, despite not hitting too well his first two years, and now he's developed into a very good hitter, I'll agree with that. But his offensive potential was always there.

Izturis was always a BA dependent hitter, and Ash for whatever reason felt Cesar could handle a leap from A to AAA at age 20 (Ash had a funny way of thinking). If Izturis can keep hitting .300, factoring in his defense, he's a definitely a valuable player. The question is, can we expect .300 every year? He's only 24, so there's still a lot of time before his prime. I can definitely see an Omar Vizquel type career for Cesar if he continues to develop.

With that said, the chances Izturis had of lasting in Toronto, under Ricciardi, with back to back below .600 OPS's was not too good. I still think we gave up on Lopez too quickly, but the jury is still out on that. If it was his attitude that shipped him out, he was only 22, you're not going to see a Mike Bordick attitude at that age.

What was this thread about again? :)

http://tsf.waymoresports.thestar.com/thestar/baseball/player.cgi?2436

Yeah, Young was a talented hitter in the minors. Texas was really patient with him, so I assume it is because of his defense. You're right though- the Omar Vizquel/Ozzie Smith career path (in faded colors obviously) would be more appropriate for Izzy.

If nothing else, these discussions are a reminder of just how bad/directionless the Ash years were...

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=1846566
On a side note, is anyone else pretty disgusted with the way the media has handled the Ricky Williams retirement? They've never been very kind to him, even when he revealed he suffered from depression and social anxiety disorder. Now with his early retirement this has only gotten worse.

I heard two guys on ESPN radio implying that Williams faked his depression because he liked attention, and this was another ploy to get attention.

And lines like this appear in an ESPN article:

Long before Williams decided he wanted to commune with hut people, and travel the world wafting on the wings of a self-produced purple haze...

Sometimes the media as a whole seems to display an immense lack of understanding towards certain issues.

...said the season would turn into a battle for fourth place, the Jays are two games out of third.

While that is techincally true, its also true that they are in 5th, and facing 3 games against the Yankees and then the Rays again, while the Rays have 3 against Kansas City and 3 hosting Toronto.

So we may be 2 games back of third NOW, but we could as easily be buried as here by next weekend

My Optimism Thermometer is falling...
The Search isnt' working right now, so I can't compare my numbers from before, but I'm thinking 500 from here on out is pretty tough.

Against the Yankees, Boston, Oakland and Texas, the Jays have 29 Games left, against Baltimore and Tampa Bay 21 and against the rest of the AL, 13.

Baltimore has a very tough schedule, with 10 games against the likes of Detriot and Anaheim and a whole bunch of Oakland, Texas, Minnesota, Boston and Yankees... but Tampa's schedule looks alittle easier than ours...

We if manage 500 ball we should be able to over take Baltimore I'd think..

http://me.woot.net
I think it's pretty clear that the Jays are destined for third this season; Tom Cheek said that he thinks the team will make it on his first time back calling games after his surgery. The Baseball Gods will smile on us.

Is Izturis really 24 is another question.

My Optimism Thermometer is falling

Can it get any lower?

http://www.thewolfshack.com
As the season progresses I get more depressed about this season, but more impressed about the future. So in contrast to Darryn, I think my optimism themometer is rising.

There's so many great young players in TO right now. The struggles that the team's had have been primarily with the veterans.

My Optimism Thermometer is falling

Can it get any lower?

It could I suppose,
at the break I estimated 500 for the rest of the year would bring 78 wins I think... 10 days later I revised that to 74, or so...

its 2005 that I'm worried about, I said 78 there too, I think, now I'm thinking we are better off sliding way back so that 500 ball in 2006 looks like a really big improvement!

Paul:

I was working on a 3 ranges thermometer based on win totals for the next 3 years...

and I'm in the range of 74/78/80... but the search isn't working so I can't remember what I had before.

I like what Bush has been doing, but if you read the Prospects notes he seems to be a bit of a surprise... that is uncommon, do you think there is a chance that he is running on pure adrenalin?

that is uncommon, do you think there is a chance that he is running on pure adrenalin?

It's probably just that he's on a good run. Of course, if a player is on a good run, he's lucky. If a player is on a bad run, it's because he sucks.

RE: Bush. Look at the numbers he put up in the minors. He struggled a bit in Syracuse, but his other numbers are spectacular. There's nothing in his record that would suggest he'd flame out in the bigs. He's going to have his rough patches like anyone else, and there will be times he'll look like he can't get anyone out. I don't see anything in his record to suggest he won't be an effective major league starter.

As the major Russ Adams booster hereabouts, I'll come back and say that we haven't seen the best of him yet. He's been fighting some nagging injuries off and on this year and is playing for a simply dreadful Syracuse squad. But even so, he's right at his almost-trademark .279/.354/.393 line for the season, with a 37/39 BB/K rate and 31 doubles -- more than he'd previously accumulated in his entire pro career combined.

Take a moment to consider how remarkably consistent Adams has been the last couple of years:

Year      Level      Line
2003      High-A     .279/.380/.388
2003      AA         .277/.349/.387
2004      AAA        .279/.354/.393

Give this guy 350-400 AB in the major leagues next year and I flatly predict that's the line he'll produce. Does he have anything more than doubles power right now? No, but as a full-time leadoff man -- something the Jays, with all respect to Reed Johnson, don't have -- he wouldn't need more than that (though I also wouldn't start him at leadoff on Opening Day). It's true he hasn't been running this year, but he entered 2004 with a career 35/6 SB/CS rate as a professional; he can steal if he wants to. Adams can get on base and he can score runs, and that's all he'll need to do as a rookie.

The defensive questions, however, are worth asking. He has 25 errors in 87 games at Syracuse, and from what I understand, most of them are related to throwing; his arm reportedly is taxed by throws from the hole and he errs in trying to make up for them. Trouble is, your throwing arm generally doesn't get stronger all of a sudden, so Adams will have to compensate through positioning, mechanics and release. If he can't do that, then he probably won't be the answer at shortstop for Toronto, and he may end up being a very valuable trade commodity, since 2B at Skydome is a filled position. But I'm not ready to say he can't, not when Mike Bordick spent last spring training raving about Adams' potential at shortstop. I still say he's a keeper.

And I sixth the motion that Orlando Cabrera would have been a fine solution at shortstop in 1999, but not today. Spend the money on a corner bat or a deputy ace.

Hypothetically, Ricciardi could have put Izturis back in the minors for a season or two in hopes he could improve his hitting.

But who cares? That trade turned out really, really badly for the Jays. I'm sure Ricciardi himself has no problem admitting that. If he could go back in time, I'm sure he wouldn't do things the same way. He could also make a fortune betting on Florida to win the World Series.

DP, I'm Brooklyn. COMN for my email. I'd definately be interested in the Aug. 9 game.

What sucks about '04 is it means another '04-'05 offseason talking/thinking about the Jays potential, which it seems like I've been doing since 1997...the good news is my Yankee fan friends have stopped laughing at me when I do it, and now just thinks it's sad...

I'm thinking that Bush's hits allowed numbers in Syracuse are a bit deceiving. With all the injuries the Chiefs' OF defense in particular must have been very poor. They were trotting out Clapp and Pond in the OF at one point. He also allowed few HR's. I think he'll benefit from the Jays much improved defense.

Bush's minor-league record has in fact been a harbinger of future success in the majors. His K/BB and K/IP rates have been tremendous throughout his career, and you won't find any two stats that better predict success for a pitcher.

He is going to get knocked around on more than one occasion; his raw stuff is secondary to his command and his ability to change speeds. But changing speeds and locating your pitches are what pitching is all about, and Bush has a great knack for both at just 24. He certainly won't keep his ERA in the 2.00s, and even a low 3.00 would be a huge surprise, and you can expect him to get shelled every so often. But by this time next year, he'll be at least as reliable as Batista or Lilly, and has a good chance to be a lot more than that.

As one who predicted in the crystal ball thread that David Bush would be called up in July (one of my few correct predictions) and would go 10-2, I'm deeply hurt that anyone would suggest that Bush certainly won't keep his ERA in the 2.00s.:)

Seriously, in addition to his talent, he has guts. That was plainly visible in yesterday's outing. What's not to like?

Personally, I'd compare David Bush to Brad Radke. An inning eater who will get hit around on occasion, but will display well above-average control, decent strike out ability, and consistently have ERA's in the 4.00-4.50 range, peaking in the high 3.00's some years. Solid middle of the rotation starter, IMO.

I'd be pretty happy if Bush turned into Brad Radke. He's a solid 2/3 guy.

I heard two guys on ESPN radio implying that Williams faked his depression because he liked attention, and this was another ploy to get attention.

He faked a phobic aversion to attention in order to get attention? Um, OK...

Sometimes the media as a whole seems to display an immense lack of understanding towards certain issues.

Mental health is an issue that the public as a whole simply does not want to tangle with. As for the media, they're a leader in this regard... the media are always seeking soft targets who won't or can't fight back, and the mentally ill are perfect; the very imperfection that leaves them open to attack makes them unlikely to defend themselves, and ill-equipped to do so if they try.

I'd be careful with calling it a "lack of understanding". I think it's deliberate malice, as opposed to blithe ignorance, that causes reporters, commentators and editorialists to display these types of attitudes. I'm sure that these guys "get it"... but it makes them look so much tougher and cleverer to take a shot at a sitting duck.

Not sure if Coach is around for BBFL, but here are the Barfield updated standings. I had a really strong week, and lost 9-2-1 to Slippery Pete.

Rank	Team	                 W-L-T	        WPct	GB
 1	Slippery Pete	        118-66-8	0.635	-
 2	Ghost Man On Third	117-69-6	0.625	2
 3	Good Sports	        108-78-6	0.578	11
 4	Pistol Nine	        102-81-9	0.555	15.5
 5	team junior felix	 97-83-12	0.536	19
 6	TMG Eh's	         94-81-17	0.534	19.5
 7	Edmonton Decepticons	 97-87-8	0.526	21
 8	HOMER JAYS Simpsons	 94-87-11	0.518	22.5
 9	Middleclass Elitists	 93-88-11	0.513	23.5
 10	Capers	                 95-91-6	0.510	24
 11	MonkeymenCubed	         90-90-12	0.500	26
 12	Vancouver Cyphers	 93-94-5	0.497	26.5
 13	Freddy Beach Fracas	 89-93-10	0.490	28
 14	Anarchist Archivists	 85-98-9	0.466	32.5
 15	Canadian wannabe	 84-102-6	0.453	35
 16	W-A-M-C-O	         85-104-3	0.451	35.5
 17	1-Tool Wonders	         78-103-11	0.435	38.5
 18	Schroedingers Bat	 74-110-8	0.406	44
 19	Ben's Men	         73-113-6	0.396	46
 20	The Sweaty Guys	         68-116-8	0.375	50

Slippery Pete and Ghost Man on Third almost have the bye week wrapped up barring a total collaspe. The fight for the other 4 playoff spots are all up for grabs.

On the Adams front, the key issue is his defence. His offense to date has primarily been derived from his .280ish average and good walk rate. His walk rate has been falling as he has advanced leagues (not surprising due to improved pitching). I wouldn't be surprised to see it fall a little further at the major league level until he is able to show some power. I wouldn't be surpised to see a .270/.330/.370 line from Adams. You can survive with that line from your SS if your getting league average or better defence from that position.

With Bush, I think he is going to be a solid major league pitcher but I think JP has it nailed in that he looks closer to Josh Towers than to Doc Halliday. I could see him settling in nicely as the #4 or 5 starter with a mid-4.00 ERA (i.e around league average). That seems like a backhanded compliment but its not. Watching the procession of failed starters here over the last few years tells you that reliable 4th starters don't grow on trees.

I'm pretty confident that Lopez will never have more trade value than he did that winter. The fact that the return on Lopez has (to date) been uninspiring shouldn't blind us to the fact that the trigger was pulled at the right time. Even in hindsight, it was a good decision to trade Lopez; it wasn't much of a decision to get what the team got.

In 2001, at age 21, Lopez hit .279/.333/.506 in AAA (358 AB), followed by a .260/.304/.418 campaign in the majors that year (177 AB). He had a rough 2002 in the majors, but was sent down and hit .318/.419/.457 in AAA (282 AB) at age 22. On what basis would you say the Lopez deal was justified? Five tool SS prospects don't grow on trees, especially ones who have shown promising hitting ability at AAA and the majors at age 21-22.

Since then, he's only had a little over 220 at bats at the major league level over two years. Players like Lopez need time to develop, and the only way to develop is to get consistent AB's, which he hasn't gotten yet.

Hindsight or otherwise, this was not a very sound trade, whether you are a Lopez fan or not.

I had a really strong week, and lost 9-2-1 to Slippery Pete

Oops. That was 8-3-1. Millar's week snuck me to a .001 victory in slugging.

I wouldn't be surpised to see a .270/.330/.370 line from Adams.

That's right around where I have him pegged as well. Maybe a higher on-base percentage depending on how his walk totals adjust at the major league level, but I can't see him being any better than a +.700 OPS hitter. Which is why it would be ideal to find a long-term SS alternative from outside the organization, and trade Adams to a team like the A's who have pitching to deal and a need at 2B.

Finding the long-term SS from outside the organization will be the difficult part, which is why for the time being, Adams will be a necessity at short.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=fanball-bluejaysbushdominant&prov=fanball&type=lgns
Glad to see Jays getting the attention they deserve from the international media.

If Adams will hit .270/.330/.370 why would the A's want him? He won't be able to help this year, and incumbent Mark Ellis hit .248/.313/.373 in 2003. Adams maybe a better player than Ellis, but the difference is not noticable, and Oakland likely wouldn't trade anything of much value for a minor upgrade.

Not sure if Coach is around for BBFL

Yeah, I'm around, but under the weather. That thread is up now; sorry it was late.

David Bush will be stepping into Da Box in a day or two, as soon as I can get our 20-minute conversation transcribed, edited and posted. The comparison to Towers is appropriate -- Dave makes it himself, though he's too modest to point out that he has slightly better pure stuff than Josh. The Radke comparison sounds good to me, but who knows? The guy has only been a starting pitcher for 16 months. Bush must get through the inevitable period of adjustment when AL hitters become more familiar with him. After that, we'll have a much better idea if he's a 2, 3 or 4, but one thing seems certain already -- he's a big-league starter.

Glad to see Jays getting the attention they deserve from the international media.

Too bad they referred to David as the trouble-making Padres' number 1 draft pick Matt Bush.

Apparantly they're not paying THAT much attention.

If Adams will hit .270/.330/.370 why would the A's want him? He won't be able to help this year, and incumbent Mark Ellis hit .248/.313/.373 in 2003. Adams maybe a better player than Ellis, but the difference is not noticable, and Oakland likely wouldn't trade anything of much value for a minor upgrade.

It should be added that Ellis is _spectacular_ defensively. Oakland is not keeping him around for his bat.

Having said that, I think that everyone is being a little impatient with Adams. Not all guys go through the minors and experience immediate success. My guess is that as he ages, Adams will hit for more power. He's going to hit around 40 doubles this year -- some of those will end up flying over fences once he gets a little more experienced and gains some strength.

He may hit .270/.330/.370 in his rookie season, but I would not be surprised at all if he has a few seasons later this decade where his OBP approaches .400 and he slugs in the mid 400's. That's not Arod, but it's still pretty valuable.

My guess is that Adams will repeat AAA in 2005, and put up much better numbers in his second time around. And he'll be promoted for good in July.

At least they didn't call him George...

I started the sign Jose Valentin movement, and I'll continue fanning the flames here. I'm tired of Woody, Gomez/Menechino are not everyday players, and Adams/Hill are not ready.

Valentin is an ideal stopgap candidate. He'll hit for some power, and the pitching staff will love having him playing behind them. A 1+1 deal at 3MM per season sounds about right to me.

The thing about Adams is that he's been remarkably consistant (as shown above) at every level. That's good and bad. It's hard to argue that his numbers this year are a by-product of advancing to a new level. I'd be surprised if he did substantially better in AAA next year. I think what you see is what you get. My point above was that that isn't terrible so long as he can play good defense. He may add power as he gets older but that may just offset the fact that major league pitchers may throw him a lot more strikes until he shows he's got some power.

Since then, he's only had a little over 220 at bats at the major league level over two years. Players like Lopez need time to develop, and the only way to develop is to get consistent AB's, which he hasn't gotten yet.

In 2003 at AAA, he hit 280/333/399 in 35 games. This year he's hitting 273/329/423 in 75 games, which isn't even as good as Russ Adams, who is also younger. Not only hasn't he improved, but Lopez has actually gotten worse.

Of course, it's debatable how predictable his stagnation was. But if the rumours of a lax work ethic were true, then it is pretty predictable: The longer you play at a level, the more you're going to have to work in order to succeed.

In 2003 at AAA, he hit 280/333/399 in 35 games. This year he's hitting 273/329/423 in 75 games, which isn't even as good as Russ Adams, who is also younger. Not only hasn't he improved, but Lopez has actually gotten worse.

Plus his K/BB is about 3/1. Guys who strike out a lot and get very few walks in AAA tend not to project well.

Matt, that was the joke.

This Matt Bush sounds pretty good with his 2.00 ERA and 1-1 record and all.

Brad Radke is a solid #2 and a reasonable #1. He's been a very very good major league pitcher for a number of years.

I also think that Radke is a good comp for David Bush.

The one difference with Radke and Bush is that Radke has one of the better change-ups in the game. I don't think Bush has one pitch that you would call an "out" pitch or is that outstanding.

Geez, I've now made what look like two backhanded compliments to Bush. Not intended. I think he's going to be a big part of the rotation for the next few years.

Bush's change-up looked awfully good to me yesterday. It could get better too.

In 2003 at AAA, he hit 280/333/399 in 35 games. This year he's hitting 273/329/423 in 75 games, which isn't even as good as Russ Adams, who is also younger. Not only hasn't he improved, but Lopez has actually gotten worse.

Of course, it's debatable how predictable his stagnation was. But if the rumours of a lax work ethic were true, then it is pretty predictable: The longer you play at a level, the more you're going to have to work in order to succeed.

Jason Arnold's regression has been just as bad than Lopez's, and Lopez actually had moderate success at a high level, unlike Arnold (unless you consider his 2003 AAA campaign a success, it was okay, nothing earth shattering).

My point was, Lopez is a 5-tool SS, was 22 at the time of the trade, and was coming off a good AAA campaign (hit over .300). I don't see how it was justified to move him, at the time, for a middle of the rotation prospect (and yes, Arnold was considered one at the time of the deal, "wonky delivery" too from what I remember). The deal didn't make a whole lot of sense. Unless Lopez's attitude problems were so huge that he had to be dealt, we'll never know that for sure, but at 22, he wasn't going to be Mike Bordick attitude-wise anyway.

Right now, it doesn't appear to be a bad move, but I'd put the chances of Lopez becoming an above average SS at a higher likelyhood than Arnold being anything more than a #5 starter (or a starter period, I see him in the pen eventually). We'll see.

One gutsy solution for next year, which seems to make sense to me for both teams, would be to trade Hudson to Oakland for Joe Blanton and Dave Johnson. It's a trade that I would happily do for either team. For Oakland, Blanton is blocked at the majors, and with Koonce, Johnson is redundant. Next year, Koonce replaces Durazo, but Hatteberg is still signed through 2005. In exchange for two surplus, blocked prospects, they would get an almost all-star calibre second baseman who is one year away from arbitration, which means they have 2B filled for the next four years.

For Toronto, while trading Hudson would no doubt be a big blow, you would be able to free up 2B for Adams next year, a position he would be better suited to. Simultanesouly, you can have Blanton compete with Miller for the 5th starter position to push each other, and you also get a 1B prospect to either replace Carlos, or to use as a full time DH. You then live with Gomez/Menechino/Woodward for half a year next year as the SS, until Hill picks up 300 ABs in Syracuse next year, at which point you promote him.

Trades like this can be painful, but sometimes you have to give a lot to get a lot.

Jays Roster Question:

I can't figure out the 15 non-active players on the 40-man roster.
I've got:
Arnold, File, Lopez, Peterson, Quiroz, Sequea, Gross, Clark
McGowan, Rosario, JFG
Miller, DLS, Doc

That's only 14. Who am I missing?

Further info:
Before roster moves - 25/40 (active roster full, 40-man roster full)
Hentgen retires - 24/39
Adams traded - 23/38
Douglass purchased - 24/39
Nakamura recalled - 25/39

It's killing me here, I can't figure out who isn't accounted for. Is it Hattig?

Rob - couldn't the Jays just be one under on their 40-man roster?

The Jays are in fact currently one man under the 40 man limit... Teams do not always have the 40 man roster full. I remember a couple winters ago after Epstein took over and they had a number of free agents pending, Boston only had 28 players on their roster for quite some time.

Nigel - they could. They very well could. I didn't think of that at the time I was looking over the roster.

Makes sense, anyway. Adams out, Douglass in. Hentgen out. Problem solved, I guess. :)