Personally I am a fan of Hudson batting in the 2 spot, as long as Cat is slowed up. I think the last two spots right now should be whoever is catching at 8 and Woody at number 9. I agree with those who don't

I'd like to see this

Rios
Hudson
Wells
Delgado
Hinske
Gross
Johnson DH
Cash
Woody

Somehow the last few words got lost..

*I agree with those who do not like Zaun in the 5 spot

Sounds to me like the Indians are due for a let-down. :-)

http://me.woot.net
Lineup courtesey of Yahoo sports. Cat's the DH.

A. Rios
O. Hudson
V. Wells
C. Delgado
E. Hinske
F. Catalanotto
G. Zaun
G. Gross
C. Woodward

I like that lineup, although I'd like to see Cash over Zaun.

I know it's only 2 games but it appears JG is a bigger fan of Woody than Tosca was.

I like that lineup, although I'd like to see Cash over Zaun.

I see your point, but I think with Bush pitching I'd just as soon have the veteran catching. Cash can work with Batista and Lilly and... uhh...well, any other experienced starters we can find.

Can Lexy fly? Or can Lexy fly?

After seeing Hinske batting #5, I decided to look at his numbers since I haven't for awhile.

They're awful. There has been a lot of talk about the disappointment of Phelps, but what about Hinske? Last year was supposed to an aberration, due to injuries and the dreaded "sophomore slump." But this year, his numbers are even worse: .319 OBP with .382 SLG. Most notably it's his doubles that are off. Last year he only hit 12 homers, but had 45 doubles. This year he only has 18 double in about 40 less at-bats.

I'm glad that his defense is better, but it's not enough to make up for this lack of production. I'm beginning to really wonder about that rookie year of his...

but I think with Bush pitching I'd just as soon have the veteran catching.

Good point, but I think I'd still like to throw the two young guys out there and see how they do.

Yet another arrogant umpire. I could read his lips - he doesn't need to use expletives with Delgado.

Well I guess it evens out. I thought ball four to Wells was a strike, but I don't think Carlos swung.

It's not the call of the ump that bothered me, it was the arrogance of it.

The zone looks pretty tight tonight-at this rate it'll be a 11-10 game.

Good Work with the Hinske info!!

Without even looking at the numbers its easy to tell Hinske is not the same as he was during his rookie season. He seemed much more clutch and dependable that year. This year every time he gets up, i'm not expecting much.

Looks like Joe Randa out there!

They have a pretty nifty drum there in Cleveland as well.

I'm also worried about Hinske and thinking his rookie season was a fluke. I cut him slack last season because he was injured but at spring training this season Hinske said he was fully 100% and he lost weight and was in the best shape of his life.

A 700 OPS is really poor especially considering he plays a corner position on the field.

The gamble with Wells 5/15 mil worked out but the Hinske one doesn't look good right now.

I've never been a fan of Hinske but I like the passion he plays with. I remember in his rookie season after a bad call he yelled at the ump from the dug out and was protecting his teammate.

Great pitch to get Martinez while Tabby was drooling over him.

Ewww, Gross...

This year he only has 18 double in about 40 less at-bats.

What's the likely cause for Hinske's lack of production this season? He has slimmed down this season, but still looks like he should be getting his doubles if everything is working right.
How much of his struggles at the plate are psychological at this point?

Quoting Rod Black on the Indians:

"They move runners. They manufacture runs."

Let's add - "He spouts cliches".

For no discernible reason, I listened to the Bob McCowan show this afternoon. He had Richard Griffin on. It was nightmarish. McCowan claims to have read and understood Moneyball, or "Idiotball," as he cleverly calls it, but simultaneously claims that these Moneyball guys must never have seen Ricky Henderson play to approach the game the way they do.

What. The. Frig.

Would anyone be opposed to seeing only the following 25 men used for a week or so in September once the roster expands

1. Hudson 2B
2. Reed LF
3. Hinske 3B
4. Vernon CF
5. Crozier 1B
6. Rios RF
7. Gross DH
8. GQ C
9. Adams SS

Bench: Cash, Menechino, Woodward, Howie Clark

Rotation: Doc (if healthy), Miggy, Lilly, Bush, Towers

Bullpen: Miller, Peterson, Ligtenberg, Frederick, Speier, Chulk, Frasor

Week long rest: Delgado, Gomez, Zaun, Cat, Berg

All 25 of the above guys are Jays property for 2005 and, with the possible exception of Quiroz and Peterson, either have played in the big leagues in 2005 or are deserving of a September callup. That 25 man unit would cost between 34 and 35 million dollars in 2005, and I believe it would be interesting to get a first hand look on how J.P. might best utilize the extra 15 million in his upcoming budget. Plus, it'd be kind of fun.

Anybody else think Hinske was (but is no longer) juicing? Seems possible to me.

The Rickey Henderson who walked 2190 times against 1694 strikeouts, or the Rickey Henderson who had a career OBP of .401?

"They move runners. They manufacture runs."

You didn't really expect "They lead the league in on-base percentage!" from Rod, did ya?

I don't know why but Tabler and Black are driving me insane tonight. I wish Tabler knew as much about the Jays as he knows about the Indians and Black is just an blathering idiot.

Bring back Faulds and Cerutti.

I need a local radio station to broadcast these games, so I can mute the TV.

Blue, you can always try the Internet links if you don't mind the 30 second delay. You've probably tried that, of course.

Where was Lawton positioned on O-Dog's 3B? He had to run further than Orlando. Was he in the midst of a chat with the centre fielder?

Thanks Rob, there's a 2 or 3 pitch delay that makes it mighty tough to keep my eyes and ears in sync.

And tell me that wasn't a makeup call on Wells!

Did I miss the meeting where Chad Durbin turned into Nolan Ryan? Jeeez.

You know this offense is horrible when Chad Durbin starts having his way with them... twice!

You know the Red Sox offense is horrible when Jorge Sosa is pitching a perfect game against them.

Wow, Eddie Murray and Josh Phelps getting alot of airtime. Eddie looks like he's really working with Josh in real time - in game.

We sure didn't see that interest in Josh's while in TO. At least not like these shots show.

Good for Eddie and the Indians, I sure hope this works out for Phelps.

Jorge Sosa's an OK pitcher as long as he doesn't have to face Delgado.

Good AB by Gross - unfortunately without any results.

That was a great pitch to finish off Gross, really. Low pitch in the zone, Gross had to swing but there wasn't much he could do.

Pat Tabler's talking about OBP and SLG... that wasn't expected.

The reason that Black is pure cliche is that he's not a baseball guy. He's a general purpose guy. All he is capable of is spouting and rehashing conventional wisdom. From a baseball point of view, he brings nothing to the table. He is the utility infielder of broadcasters. Pure ass.

What Black said: Maybe we'll see Josh pinch-hit tonight.
What Tabler didn't say: You mean when we bring in one of the left handed relievers that we don't have?

Who else would like to see Delgado step back six inches in the box? What has worked so well for so long (hanging out over the plate) just isn't working any more. How many pitches can we see in under his hands that he can't get to?

I recognize that adjustments for batters are a very big deal, especially for one who has had so much success. And I realize that Delgado has been swinging better in August. I would just like to see (a) him having more of a chance on pitches on the inner half of the plate and (b) pitchers being tempted to throw pitches away and seeing Delgado whack doubles into the LF gap (I can't recall the last such hit I saw from him).

The reason that Black is pure cliche is that he's not a baseball guy. He's a general purpose guy.

Like Brian Williams and Don Chevrier, I suppose. Williams was best doing the Olympics and Chevrier's best sport was boxing.

On the other hand, Dan Shulman was always a basketball guy before he was a baseball guy.

And I've seen Don Wittman do a very fine job on baseball and hockey although he's first and foremost a CFL guy, from back before the players wore helmets....

Nice pitch sequence to Belliard. After lashing a 2B on a curve, Belliard saw a bunch of well placed fastballs with a change thrown in. Big out.

For no discernible reason, I listened to the Bob McCowan show this afternoon. He had Richard Griffin on.

The Bob McCown show. aka "I don't really follow sports, but I know that the Toronto team sucks" show. In the winter, he has Damien Cox on and they criticize the Leafs and MLSE ENDLESSLY. Or Dave "I am the most bitter basketball observer in the city" Feschuk. Why doesn't it surprise me Grimlock that he's pals with Griffin in the summer. Oddly enough, that's the Toronto Star's triumverate of bitterness. Their criticisms might be more valid if they didn't do it ALL the time.

Anyone else read Jeff Blair today? Me Grimlock took a look while slacking off during work today. What a breath of fresh air. No agendas. No bitterness. AND he pointed Griffin and Elliot as having a personal vendetta against JP.

Heh, nice double steal. Thanks for the out.

The reason that Black is pure cliche is that he's not a baseball guy. He's a general purpose guy.

Like Brian Williams and Don Chevrier, I suppose. Williams was best doing the Olympics and Chevrier's best sport was boxing.

On the other hand, Dan Shulman was always a basketball guy before he was a baseball guy.

And I've seen Don Wittman do a very fine job on baseball and hockey although he's first and foremost a CFL guy, from back before the players wore helmets....

They should make a rule about saying Coco Crisp is the best baseball name ever. My nomination is Charlie Spikes

Apparently Tabler knows the Indians signs - not often you see an attempted steal of home (albeit a delayed double steal).

Sorry about the double post.

Did I miss Black saying: "They manufacture runs! They run themselves out of innings!"

No?

He didn't notice that the umpire had already called strike three to end the inning.

What exactly is the proper way to defend against a double steal involving homeplate? It seems like a play that would have a good success rate, though it's pretty rare.

Some Minor League Updates if anyone's interested...

Top 5
Syracuse 3
Scranton 0

Top 5
Altoona 2
New Hampshire 2

Top 5
Dunedin 0
Sarasota 3

Delayed
Auburn
Batavia

Top 6
Pulaski 0
Danville 3

Everyone's having trouble scoring runs, it seems.

I love it when Carlos goes the other way - wish he would do it more often and get teams to stop playing then exagerated shift.

Who was it that was asking for a Delgado double the other way? :)

I am falling in love with the Jays offense.

Trade them all. Keep Rios and Wells and trade every last one of the rest of the bums!!

Second baseman covers second base, shortstop angles in front of him ready to cut the throw and send it back home if he sees the guy on third break.

Bush continues to impress. A couple doubles and an infield hit in the second are his only stumbles. A halfway decent offensive attack by the Jays might help this guy win a well-pitched ballgame. He might end the season with a 3 ERA and have only 2 or 3 wins.

At least Bush looks good...pitching into the 7th, very impressive...a run or 7 would be nice though...

Absolutely no posts by impersonators will be tolerated (see Box policy). I also deleted a response to the impersonator. Posts that do absolutely nothing to further discussion may also be deleted.

Cleveland is also the highest scoring team in the major leagues. Very nice work by Bush.

Hopefully, someone will read this before it gets deleted...

lighten up. it's only a game. i guess lame and repetitive cuttlefish jokes really "further discussion" in Robert's eyes...

Who was it that was asking for a Delgado double the other way? :)

That was me. Durbin made a mistake, finally not throwing a pitch under Delgado's hands, and Delgado did what he does very well. I think he would see more of those pitches were he a little further off the plate, since some of them would be on purpose.

I would like to see Delgado have a chance to hit all pitches in the strike zone. With his current stance, he has a vulnerable spot that he can't get to, and this spot seems bigger than it ever was before.

Pull him or leave him in?

What an offensive display against one of the worst starting pitchers in baseball this season.

Lovely

I wonder if Tosca would have pulled Bush there. Probably. Right after the basehit, I was really hoping they'd leave him in. Great finish to a pretty solid game by Bush. Now the Jays have 3 outs to get 3 runs and get him a win.

tosca would have pulled bush there, so i guess chalk one up to mr. gibbons for having faith in his young pitcher.

http://www.battersbox.ca/legal.shtml
dp, did you not read the part that said "see Box policy"? I'll try to make it easier for you - Click on my name for Box policy, specifically item 6 which states that impersonations are not welcome.

Yeah, I also saw this:
Posts that do absolutely nothing to further discussion may also be deleted.

Very testy in these parts lately...

dp,

Read the Legal/Privacy section, point 6. Our policy is to delete posts by impersonators. If you don't like it you can always leave.

Ahem.

Kerry replaces Bush...

I don't want to make this seem like a "grass is always greener" comment, but I like last years trend better-when the Jays would score boatloads of runs and give up boatloads of runs. Shutouts against bad pitching staffs just bite.

Yes but holding the best offensive team in the league to 2 runs is good.

Classic pitching line for Bush: 7 IP, 8 H, 2 ER, 0 BB, 7 K.

I think we can expect a lot more of the same from him. About a hit per inning, excellent control, keeps his team in the game.

Bush is now 1-3, he could be theoretically 4-1 if the Jays scored more than .3 runs per game when he pitches. Anyway I'm impressed, if he can keep this up the Jays have to score for him eventually. And he's just 24...

This just seems like bad luck for the rookie, at least that's what I think it is. I hope the hitters don't have a grudge against him or something.

Dave Bush is looking like Brad Radke with less HRs. I like.

Rule 3A: "all users of Batter’s Box are requested to refrain from vulgarity, profanity, obscenity or personal attacks of any kind. Collegiality and respect are required of regular participants".

Robert Dudek's posts in an earlier thread:

My question for dp is ... What have you been smokin', man?

Your age fixation is getting irritating

dp told you that he didn't appreciate your attitude, in other words, took it as an unnecessary and personal attack, yet you continued on anyway.

Jonny German's posts in an earlier thread:

This is not a rhetorical question: Answer it, or I'll continue with the assumption that logic is not something you bother with.

Vic, if you look closely you'll notice a key marked "Shift", directly above the one marked "Ctrl" at the bottom left of your keyboard. Try it out sometime, particularly at the start of sentences.

One completely unncessary post mocking a poster for not using capital letters, and another post claiming someone has no logic. Unnecessary and personal insult.

How about you two (Jonny and Robby Dudek) get a room and read over the Battersbox rules yourself. I think you'll find the chapter before "Double Standard" and after "Hypocrite" to be especially informative.

Sheesh.

I've really liked Dave Bush since he walked 7 and plunked 6 in 78 innings (and struck out about 1 batter per inning) last year in Dunedin. Sometimes numbers tell a story, and this time they did not lie. He's got very fine control, he's not afraid to pitch inside (as he did to Belliard the 2nd time round tonight) he's smart, and his stuff while not overwhelming is plenty good enough.

So far, so good for Gibbons, as well. I'm glad that he hung with Bush through 7, and I like his lineup choices, even if the bats needed smelling salts tonight.

Your age fixation is getting irritating.

That's just a statement of fact. How this can be considered a personal attack is beyond me.

My question for dp is ... What have you been smokin', man?

This wasn't vulgar, profane, or obscene. It wasn't intended as a personal attack, either. It was merely a joking way to say "you wrote something stupid" (and that's not a personal attack, either; "you are stupid" would be a personal attack).

dp took it as a personal attack, and responded with "your arrogance is irritating". I agreed and I DID NOT continue on.

Lastly, Voice of (Un)Reason (if that is your real name), if the things I wrote were personal attacks how is implying that I am a hypocrite and use double standards not a personal attack?

Voice of Reason: you don't like it, leave.

Wilner's hanging around on the air with Rumack for an extra hour on 590 if anyone's interested in listening.

Griffin is sitting in his easy chair thinking to himself; "Grow up kids." as he smiles and pats his dog.

Comon fella's you are inviting alot of this crap thus, in my view have a shared responsibility. You have your million hits now. Perhaps its time to think again what you all want this site to be.

Just watching the Mariners - Twins game. Edgar had to curtain calls before the game started then smacked a two run homer of Mulholland. Age before beauty? Way to go Gar.

Check that, two curtain calls ....

Lefty,

I beg to differ. I challenge people on issues, and sometimes I do so in an abrasive manner. It's a reflection of my personality, but does not necessarily apply to any other Roster member.

There is nothing wrong with this, in my view. People should be prepared to back up their statements. If the poster wants to respond in an abrasive manner (as long as he/she is making a cogent point), I have no problem with that (I have a fairly thick skin) - it adds spice to the dialogue.

Whenever there is emotion involved, occasionally someone will make a remark during a debate that goes beyond merely abrasive. If posters and readers are really bothered by it then it might be a good idea for them to look for another baseball forum.

These are my opinions only. For all I know I will be reprimanded by the other members of the roster for this post.

However, everyone should know that the way this site functions is up to the collective will of the Roster. It's for us (the Roster) to decide because of all the hard work each of us has put in to make the site what it is.

I think Mike Wilner's been reading my posts. A caller just said that the Jays needed Pat Gillick back and Wilner said something like, "I'll never understand why people in this city think that only those who have been successful in this city can ever be successful in this city." I expect radio show callers to be advocating the return of Pat Gillick until Pat Gillick (and let's hope it doesn't happen for about a century) dies. Give or take a few years.

The problem, Robert, is that when someone disagrees with you, you call their view "stupid"- and we're not talking about saying the earth is flat. This was precisly the tone you took with me during the Kielty/Stewart debate- how dare I have the audacity to suggest a consistent .300 hitter with a proven track record of success is and would continue to be more valuable than BK. In this case, I said Hill's numbers don't impress me, and because of his age I don't see him gaining that much power. And that, according to Robert, is a "stupid" opinion, because sometimes a guy turns into Nomar. Well, sometimes he doesn't. Sometimes he's grown all he's going to. So my point again- when you're right 100% of the time, you can have your attitude. But you're not, so lighten up. Baseball, in the grand scheme of things, is insignificant. Not worth being an a$$hole to people over. Especially after I've consistantly tried to be polite and complementary toward you and the work that you do.

Even if you're right, even if this is "your house", it doesn't grant you liscence to act like a dick to people that visit this place. That's all I'm going to say on the subject. If people want me to stop posting here, that's fine. But I don't think I say anything that crazy or insulting. When I disagree with people, like when I say JP isn't god walking among mortal men, I usually try to include a nod of thanks to people here who've put work into this site and provide consistently interesting material and discussion.

I kind of disagree with Wilner, I don't think Boston is a Moneyball team. THey use stats, but that doens't make them a Moneyball team. If it did, every team except for Tampa Bay and Minnesota would be a Moneyball team.

Im liking this, Wilner is doing a good job of explaining to callers what Moneyball is (and is not), that not making the playoffs in baseball (as opposed to hockey) doesnt make you a bad team, and basically just telling people to calm down and stop believing everything you read that's printed by people who seemingly have an axe to grind.

There's lots to be excited about with this team. There's plenty of good young talent here now and on the way. September is going to be lots of fun.

I just started listening now - has anything worthwhile been said?

Robert,

I think thats fair comment. However increasingly it is roster members who seem to be seem to be blowing their cool. I think dp and others the past two days or two weeks seem to be contributing to this site in goodwill and first and foremost fans of the same team you all cheer for.

I have been reading and sometimes posting here for well over a yr. There have always been some spats. As I said a few days ago if you are inviting guests into your house you should be obliged to conduct yourselves in a civil manner.

Personally I don't think your the worst offender. As you state above and would be clear to anyone who has spent some time in the Box, thats your style. You clearly are very well researched. However being the best researched poster should not be seen as carrying the biggest gun and going out on a safari on a game farm and bagging zebra for a trophy.

People just generally don't like being insulted. If this site is not intended or recommended for the casual fan or fanatic for that matter you guys ought to figure out a way to deal with that rather than having the fella's gang stomp them. Ofcourse theres going to be a bit of them and us but it should not be so evident. Thats all.

This is a great site, I think its intention is clearly different from the HBT and others. As much as the bickering grinds me down I keep dialing it back up. Says something about the quality you all put into the mix.

Thanks
Pete

It's Lilly tomorrow, right? Then we'll see Phelps I assume. He does not have an AB with Cleveland yet, and in fact, his last AB (August 2) was against Cleveland at the dome.

It's done now. Not really any news, just Wilner doing a good job having discussions with callers about the current state of the Jays. I really like his style he doesnt sit back and let the callers spout junk with nothing to back it up, he goes on the offensive and challenges the callers, most of whom just trumpet what they read in the paper that morning, to back up their opinions and when they're wrong about something he has no trouble telling them.

Has the box been invaded by a bunch of over-sensitive whiners? Just because someone uses an abrasiv word doesn't mean we all have to share our feelings. If someone thinks a post is stupid, thats as valid an opinion as any other. Lets all just relax, and not go crazy everytime a person feels slightly wronged. If someone says "thats a stupid post" just show your age by not responding, or simply saying "I disagree".
In other news, my mens league team(in Kingston) is playing an exhibition game at cooperstown. How awesome is that??

The Cleveland GM was on the FAN during the game and basically guaranteed that when Lilly pitches Josh will be in the lineup.

Guardado has a torn rotator cuff, 8 -12 months after surgery.

Soinano has an ulnar lateral ligiment tear. Tommy John surgery.

Ouch.

For Seattle, things are going from worse to, um, let me check my thesarus...

I like that too, but Wilner can be a little too quick on the offensive. It seems he assumes his next caller is going to be an idiot. At times the caller can barely get a sentence out before Wilner pounces. And then the caller has to fight to clarify, to get out what he was trying to say all along, and then Wilner backs off a little, and they somewhat agree with each other by the end. Not much of a dialogue in those situations.

Still, Wilner's the best media man in Toronto sports. And he does have a lot of idiot callers so he can be forgiven.

Well said Keith, I agree he can be a little trigger happy at times but considering the callers he usually gets it's understandable.

dp,

Here is exactly what you wrote from the other thread:

5) Lack of development by Adams/Hill

To claim that Aaron Hill, in his first full season and in AA, with his K/W ratio and OBP has shown a lack of development is ludicrous. Everything else you wrote was fairly reasonable, but that wasn't.

If Craig Burley had written that, I might have said - "Craig, buddy, what have you been smokin'?". I say stupid things sometimes and if someone said that to me I wouldn't take offence.

You obviously did. Then I wrote "Your age fixation is getting irritating." and you responded "but your arrogance is getting irritating." Then you brought up the Kielty/Stewart issue, which frankly is so far in the past that I'm not even going to look it up to see if your characterisation of my handling of it is accurate.

Then you start with your advice ... "tone it down man ... it's a f***ing game, stop taking yourself so seriously..."

I haven't given you any advice about how to behave and I don't need your advice on that subject. I did accept your characterisation of me as arrogant and made one final statement:

When I disagree with an opinion, I like to see that person come back with some sort of cogent defence of their position, or an admission of error.

And then I said nothing further in relation to your posts on that thread.

Now to the new accusations ...

The problem, Robert, is that when someone disagrees with you, you call their view "stupid"- and we're not talking about saying the earth is flat.

Really? I've made over 2000 posts in this forum and there probably aren't more than a 100 or so in which I've called a contrary view stupid or some derivation thereof.

No doubt about it-- many of the members of the "Roster" are incredibly feisty and I would say obnoxious of late. I'm not sure if it's because of the Jays or them not liking the criticism of a system that has failed to go forward this season. Maybe a bit of both.

In my experience, respect has always been a 2-way street. I question the double standard that exists when the Roster fires off insults and other off the topic comments and then deletes posts when others do the same. It is your site, but when you guys insult posters, like it or not, you are representing the site. It seems to be in very bad taste from a few of you recently.

Of course, the obvious reply is-- if you don't like it, leave. It's been posted already by the Roster. Many people will leave if they continue to be treated this way. Others will read your content and not participate.

You all are at a bit of a crossroads. Very much past the point of acceptability and respectability (well deserved, I might add), but also having to deal with what comes with that like it or not.

I hope you take the high road and treat people with respect even if in your view they are 100% wrong.

Sorry for the preaching.

Sounds like Bush did great once again. I wish I had seen the game.

It's too bad that McGowan and Arnold (and for that matter Rosario) got hurt or the Jays would have had a great back of the rotation for next year plus some left over depth for long relief.

Now...if only this team could figure out how to hit again. Delgado has been in serious need of adjustments all year and I hope it hasn't been the case where coaches have been too intimidated to ask him to make changes or he has been slow to pick up on the advice. Standing further away from the plate probably couldn't hurt as he is hardly ever pitched outside anymore anyway.

I think, believe it or not that with one more decent reliever and some starters getting healthy that this will be a very respectable pitching team next year. But at least 50% of the available resources have to go back into revitalizing this anemic offence.

I question the double standard that exists when the Roster fires off insults and other off the topic comments and then deletes posts when others do the same.

That hasn't happened. I deleted a post that was in clear violation of point #6 and one other one that contained no content whatsoever.

For an insult or series of insults to get deleted, the poster would have get very much off-colour. Basically, if someone is not contributing to the dialogue at all and is being verbally abusive, there's a decent chance that post will be deleted. And yes, members of the Roster decide where that line is.

I really like this John Gibbons. I'd put money down that he's the 2005 manager. If the Jays play .500 until the end of the season I think he's got the job. Managing is difficult, but is far easier than Tosca made it out to be. This team needs a guy to get them to relax, and just let 'em play, eg. "Woodward, you're playing SS everyday, unless you don't get a hit for a month, you're there." That's what they need. Under Tosca, all year, all we saw were bats thrown on the ground in frustration. The players knew if they didn't have a multi-hit game there was a good chance they'd see some bench.

Any thoughts on losing the hitting coach? I don't know much about him so I'm not in a position to comment. But when hitters don't hit that's usually where the finger is pointed (Tosca doesn't escape culpability here either, putting so much pressure on hitters to get hits - when they really just need to relax). Gil Patterson is the one solid coach I'd hate to see leave. I think a lot of the bullpen failures were Tosca's fault.

People who blame JP and call Tosca a scapegoat weren't watching the Jays very closely. It wasn't the system that was to blame for the record. It was the way Tosca mis-handled and stressed his players.

If we assume that people are going to be healthy I think the pitching on this team next season is going to be pretty dang good. Hallday, Lilly, Batista, Bush, Miller is a great rotation. Every one of those guys I expect to win, or at least pitch a solid game, everytime he starts. Last year I expected that of 1 guy in the rotation. Bullpen needs a little more help.

I expect most of the money in the off-season to go to fixing the uncertainty at 1B and SS, if there's anything left over another bullpen arm would be nice but as we've seen this year "proven" relievers can have a tendency to implode when brought to Toronto. Im hearing that there will be a ton of relievers available this off-season which sounds like it should help too.

I stumbled across this site this summer, and I’ve enjoyed it tremendously. I can’t say enough about the work that people put into it, and I tremendously enjoy things like the daily roundup, as well as the game threads. That being said, the snark quotient does seem to be turned way up recently. I got reamed out by Dudek for being so stupid as to think that OPS was still relevant in a discussion that started about TINSTAAPP. It didn’t really seem necessary to me, but hey, if a guy who knows that much gets off by going after people who are still getting familiar with this stuff, well, whatever gets you through the night. We all have to compensate for our deficiencies somehow.

One other comment about something I’ve noticed on the site of late, there does seem to be a heavily enhanced feeling of one-ness with the team. For people that seem to pride themselves on bashing guys like Griffin and Elliott, with repeated reference to them being more likely to write positive stories if JP was nice to them, many people around here seem awfully willing to kiss ass of guys like Wilner and Blair. There is a certain amount of groupthink.

One final point. If in 2000 posts, a person has called something that someone else said stupid 100 times, that's 5% of your posts. You can disagree without being an asshole.

Robert,

I wasn't really commenting specifically on today's events, just a general perception that criticism of the Jays isn't very welcome here.

Craig posted this on the site today in the SABR thread: He treated me with kindness, as an equal baseball fan, though we had never met before.

It would be great if the Roster followed suit, even when respectfully disagreeing on baseball matters.

Keith Talent-- you have captured many of my thoughts on Tosca with one sentence.

Managing is difficult, but is far easier than Tosca made it out to be.

There is a certain amount of groupthink.

Of course. That's because we're right ;)

Seriously though I like those guys because IMHO they're fair. Certain columnists IMHO are not. Every once in awhile they'll actually make a decent point that I agree with but it's rare. Maybe it's just my personality but I prefer patience to knee-jerk reactions, and I prefer positive criticsm to hopeless and constant negativity. You can call it "ass-kissing" if it helps you compensate for your deficiencies though :)

Long time lurker, infrequent poster... It seems to me as well the roster members have been particularly aggressive of late. The aggressiveness of tone, I don't find really to be bad. Everyone has a right to carry on the discussion in a way he or she'd like to. However, Robert's statement that posts which don't forward the discussion or however he put it seemed pretty power-happy to me. I mean there's tons of fun and trivial stuff which gets posted here which, while not necessarily progressing the discussion, contributes to the sprit of the community. Robert's statement sounded almost like something of a threat to me.

There have been a few newer posters who I wouldn't call sold on the moneyball way of doing things. Are the regulars feeling a little threatened (and I don't mean this condescendingly at all) that 'outsiders' are perhaps encroaching?

Tyler,

The TINSTAAP discussion got out of hand and it was mostly my fault - I was having a bad day. However, I don't recall the specific things I wrote in response to your posts that were abusive.

About the groupthink issue. Are you referring to the members of the Roster or the posters at large? There are plenty of posters who have been critical of J.P. and even some that have been complimentary of Griffin on occasion.

But it is true that a large majority of the Roster agrees with the philosophy espoused by J.P. (and by extension, Wilner). Thus, it is not surprising that they vehemently disagree with almost everything that Griffin and Elliott write (I myself don't read their work anymore).

There have been a few newer posters who I wouldn't call sold on the moneyball way of doing things. Are the regulars feeling a little threatened (and I don't mean this condescendingly at all) that 'outsiders' are perhaps encroaching?

That's pretty much the crossroads I was referring to. I don't thing the regulars are threatened by it, so much as challenged by figuring out the best way to respond to those that don't agree.

One final point. If in 2000 posts, a person has called something that someone else said stupid 100 times, that's 5% of your posts. You can disagree without being an asshole.

I know. Let's say that in 40% of my posts I'm disagreeing with someone. That means that 35% of the time I don't say their opinion is stupid and the other 5% of the time I do.

And frankly, occasionally people should get called out if they say something really stupid. My favourite example was from a Congressional hearing about the possible contraction of the Minnesota Twins. Bud Selig was off on one of his ramblings and Jesse Ventura answered him in immortal fashion: "That's asinine, Mr. Selig". I'll never forget it; it was absolutely the appropriate response by Ventura.

Moneyball is a religion in the world of baseball, so people are bound to be passionate about it. I think healthy discussion about it is great for the game and for the site.

I mean there's tons of fun and trivial stuff which gets posted here which, while not necessarily progressing the discussion, contributes to the sprit of the community. Robert's statement sounded almost like something of a threat to me.

I deleted a post that had absolutely no content. It wasn't whimsical or off-topic - it had no purpose and did absolutely nothing. It's actually a rare event, which is why this is only the second time I've deleted such a post in the 18 months I've been a member of the roster. I might be the only roster member ever to delete a post for that reason.

And now you've hyped it so much that I'm curious to know what the post said, Robert. :)

I think there is a fine line between calling an opinion stupid and a person stupid. I think that line has been crossed more recently by members of the Roster.

Time to get off the soapbox.

I think some wins would do wonders for board morale. Good night.

Basically, if someone is not contributing to the dialigue at all

Am I back in high school? The percentage of posts by and in regards to feelings that have been hurt is outstandingly high these past few weeks. The 'sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me' policy really applies here.

Maybe re-thinking the effciency of writing with an attitude would be beneficial (in so far as effective communication); and it might also be helpful if we were slightly more tolerant of one another and developed thicker skin.

The quality of discussion has undoubtably suffered because of the continual conflict that occurs between a fairly regular segment of the posting population (I'm not excluding myself in that segment). I respectfully submit that folks need to get past the rhetoric in the posts and concentrate on the meatier content that has to do with baseball (I'm not suggesting the exclusion of every other topic, just the personal quips that appear to spark unnecessarily long threads like this one).

It's cheesy as hell but "I" statements will almost always keep personal conflict to a minimum.

Civil discussion used to be a strength here; I'm not saying it's a weakness quite yet but we're, unfortunately, moving in that direction.

This is a good discussion. Its really nice to see folks coming out and making their comments regarding how they view this site. I hope the "Roster" view these comments in the spirit they are being written. If I had a stake in this site I'd take these comments back and analyse what they mean.

Sweat asked if Da Box has been invaded by a bunch of whiners. Thats just an F.O. attitude and does nothing to generate discussion. Gang mentality! This site should not drive fans apart but used to bring them together. I bet thats what its primary function was meant to be.

By way of suggestion perhaps its time to survey the clientele. Maybe someone like HFH, technical assistance from Joe and overseen by Coach should do up an esurvey. Ask some hard questions and let people express how they view the site. You might be overwhelmed by the lurkers coming out of the woodwork who just might have something to contribute to the ongoing success of battersbox.ca.

If it isn't growing its dying. Please don't think I'm a capitalist or something, I really pitch lefthanded and Lefty was my favorite Wilbury.
Thanks

If you come here and offer a rational defence of any position, I will debate it with you if I think you are wrong and it's a worthwhile issue. In this a forum and in Baseball Primer I've critiqued Michael Lewis's book as well as some of the theses that some in the baseball community espouse that are regarded as "Moneyballish" in nature.

As a quick example, I defended the Marlins trade of Choi and Penny to LA for Encarnacion, Mota and LoDuca, even though a majority of people at Hardball Times, Baseball Think Factory, this site and (probably) Baseball Prospectus thought it was a steal for LA. My position is that it helps Florida this year, makes LA a little worse off this year but helps them a lot in 2005 and 2006.

There's a lot of stuff that "stat-heads" have proclaimed that I don't agree with.

http://www.immune26.tv
One of the things I love about us Canadians is that by our standards this "tiff" is a bust-up. I have never been on a site where SO MUCH of the discussion, comments and posts were more or less polite, professional, etc.

I'm so happy I found a "family" that all care so much about the team and sport I love. Everybody...chill. I don't want nothin' bad happen' to my family!

Beacuse I live in Lotusland ain't no body but me gonna read this...all you Eastern types being tucked into your beddies by now.

Heck maybe I am impersonating Lefty. Hell no, I am Lefty.

And check that again, my HFH above, I meant Named for Hank ofcourse.

And as JG might say,

Lefty out.
Take care everyone.

I can state with reasonable certainty that the purpose of the site is:

1) to provide content on the Jays and other baseball matters,

and

2) to maintain high quality discourse about baseball and occasionally other matters (including whimsical sidetracks).

It's point #2 that has proven increasingly tricky and I welcome suggestions about how to pursue that goal.

I think point number two is only solved by a subscription fee and/or registration.

I think what we have here is a little bit of siege mentality. Many of us, and certainly I'm one among them, believe: a) Ricciardi's approach is the best way to address the Jays situation, and b) the team would not be watching Baltimore and Tampa disappear into the distance.

I bet I'm not the only person who finds himself trying to answer the question "What the hell happened? I thought you said they were getting better?" It's frustrating and depressing to have the professional nay-sayers going "NYAH NYAH NYAH."

Moneyball is a religion in the world of baseball, so people are bound to be passionate about it.

OK, but isn't that weird? Not to reduce an entire book to a single sentence (now watch me do it!), but isn't the basic "Moneyball" premise as follows:

"When you have limited financial resources, you have to look for bargains."

How radical is that? Sheesh. You'd think men from Mars had landed.

A bargain is something that has a real worth in excess of its perceived worth. When the book was written, Billy Beane apparently regarded players with power on high on-base as under-valued; this year he seems to regard players with defensive skills as under-valued. And in both cases he has responded accordingly.

It's not really a baseball philosophy. It's a business philosophy. And its application to baseball changes as the circumstances in baseball change.

Wow, lots of typos in the previous. It's late, it's late. Hope you get my drift...

I agree Magpie---I was surprised to find it in the business section of my bookstore and not the sports section, but upon reading it found out why. I suppose I should've said that SABR is a religion of baseball, but perhaps that isn't entirely correct either.

I suppose I should've said that SABR is a religion of baseball, but perhaps that isn't entirely correct either.

If Burley reads this we might have to put him in restraints.Respectfully, Mr. JackFoley, you are not familiar with the nature of SABR.

Am I the only one who really wants some vodka whenever I see a post by Smirnoff? It gets worse every time

I think thats just because you're a raging alcoholic.

I think thats just because you're a raging alcoholic.

Clearly no one read my "'I' statements as much as possible" post :-)

I think we need an official Batters Box kegger. You guys buy the booze, I will bring the la-dayz.

Robert, seems you failed to take your anti-sophestry elixir today:

I said: "I mean there's tons of fun and trivial stuff which gets posted here which, while not necessarily progressing the discussion, contributes to the sprit of the community. Robert's statement sounded almost like something of a threat to me."

You replied: "I deleted a post that had absolutely no content. It wasn't whimsical or off-topic - it had no purpose and did absolutely nothing. It's actually a rare event, which is why this is only the second time I've deleted such a post in the 18 months I've been a member of the roster. I might be the only roster member ever to delete a post for that reason."

I never questioned the reasonableness of deleting the post. You probably had good reason to do so. My post was in respect to the tone in which you almost dared people to make whimsical post. It sounded pretty power happy. Your reply of course made it sound like I questioned the reasonableness of deleting the post.

Again...

Posters were pointing out that you've been ornery of late and you replied: "And frankly, occasionally people should get called out if they say something really stupid. My favourite example was from a Congressional hearing about the possible contraction of the Minnesota Twins. Bud Selig was off on one of his ramblings and Jesse Ventura answered him in immortal fashion: "That's asinine, Mr. Selig". I'll never forget it; it was absolutely the appropriate response by Ventura."

No one was saying people shouldn't get called out sometimes if they say something really stupid. The point was in respect to the frequency of your calling out.

My apologies Mr. Dudek, I was merely trying to participate in conversation. Back to the shadows I go!

Ah, growing pains. Am I the average visitor? At about 1/2 per day logged here over the last two years, I've spent over 21,000 minutes reading posts at this site. I come mostly for the incredible minor league system coverage. I enjoy learned debaters, less so merely clever ones. Coach had a great line about a poster being like "Richard Griffin without a spell checker," or Griffin being like the poster with a spell checker, can't remember which. I like cuttlefish and muppets. Then again, I am a cat AND a dog person. As any group grows, there will always be those who come in with a different vision (or no vision) and try to take over, or just mess with the "vibe." It is up to leadership to set the course. What should that look like? I don't know. Is there dissention in the Cabal? Is one of their own messing with the vibe? I don't know. Curious about what life without this site would be like, I popped over to the official site's fan forum. The first thread: "Which Jay has the nicest body?" Do you really want to mess with Da Box????

Good post, David. Battersbox is an enjoyable use (waste?) of time for me almost every day. Living on the west coast as I do, often I read these threads long after everyone goes to bed, so I don't often contribute to them. My favorite part of the Box is the Minor League Reports and I do post there fairly often. Sometimes I offer opinions that others agree with. Other times I get shot down. I'll admit that it hurts a bit to get shot down - no-one really wants others to disagree with their opinions. That doesn't mean that argument/disagreement isn't a healthy thing.

I've been reading the Box for over a year now and have come to know the names, attitudes and opinions of many contributers. I often scan for certain names, knowing that they are going to offer insightful commentary. Robert Dudek is one of those names. Robert offers a lot to the site and I appreciate is effort. I would say that at times he is argumentative or abrasive. I wouldn't say that he, or any other member of the management is rude or power-hungry. Obviously some posters have had their feelings hurt recently. It's unfortunate that anyone feels that way, hopefully we can all move past that as a community. None of us want to spend every evening reading and writing comments about what we said or others said or why our feelings are hurt, etc. I don't have any suggestions as to how to develop a more peaceful community, but I would encourage everyone on the site to participate in making this an enjoyable place to hang out. Thanks in this regard to all of the members of the roster who created this site and contribute so much to it every day.

Is there dissention in the Cabal?

There Is No Cabal. Therefore dissension within it is impossible.

If it existed, which it does not, the members of the Cabal would be United In Joy. We're a happy group - recent events, both baseball and non-baseball, have left us bloodied but not unbowed.

One thing... Smirnoff, in case you're around, could you drop me an e-mail? craig@battersbox.ca, thanks!

Back to baseball now. I didn't get to see last night's tilt... the little man was watching "Baby Einstein" videos instead. I did catch some of the game on the radio and it's always hard to tell about a pitcher, but I was tremendously impressed with Bush's command of the game. Can those of you who were watching, especially now that you've slept on it, comment? Was he as in control as he seemed to be?

One more note before attacking a mountain of work...

I suppose I should've said that SABR is a religion of baseball, but perhaps that isn't entirely correct either.

If Burley reads this we might have to put him in restraints.Respectfully, Mr. JackFoley, you are not familiar with the nature of SABR.

Well, now Robert, I don't know. It isn't a religion *about* baseball, that's for sure. That's how sabermetrics is often criticized by the media - and nothing could be further from the truth. But is it a religion *of* baseball? Maybe. SABR is populated by the biggest seamheads on the planet... the people for whom the game is World Without End. So in a sense, Jack's not altogether wrong.

Can those of you who were watching, especially now that you've slept on it, comment? Was he as in control as he seemed to be?

Craig, in a word-Yes. With the exception of 2 curveball mistakes and a nice piece of hitting (the three hits to score the 2 runs in the 2nd), Bush was terrific. He had awesome control, took advantage of a rather low (but NOT wide) zone, and seemed to have a really good plan of attack for each hitter. I suppose Zaun also deserves credit there.

2 things struck me about his outing. The first was first pitch strikes. I don't have the numbers, but he seemed to pour in strike one a LOT. And it's also HOW he did that. It seemed like many of them were his tight curveballs. He appears to have 2 different curves-a harder one for strike one, and a slower one for strike three. He also stayed down in the zone all night with his fastball. That's his night as I saw it.

I'm reminded of a debate we all had this offseason-whether Bush should have been in the Jays Top Ten Prospects list. I didn't know enough about Bush to participate. Many argued, rather forcefully too, that he should have been, and I'd say it's pretty safe to say you were right.

For the most part, Bush was truly masterful. His last pitch of the game, the curve on which he struck Vizquel out looking, was Zitoesque. And so confident out there! He's the real deal.

I went through ESPN's pitch-by-pitch of the game. Bush faced 29 hitters and threw 19 first-pitch strikes, not an unusually high number. Cleveland were 0-1 with a sac bunt when putting the first pitch into play, meaning that 17 of 27 times Bush got ahead 0-1, a pretty good record.

Maybe we should go a little light on the members of the Cabal. Those who have faith in JP's plan, or at least are willing to let him try it are increasingly tried by the naysayers with no real plan beyond "spend more money" or "don't trade for players who's injuries you could only forsee after the fact".

It is tiresome. It's the reason I abandoned the Blue Jays' official chatsite. So if members of the Cabal get testy about that kind of attitude invading here, I understand why. Yeah, they should probly tone it down, but it shouldn't be hard to understand why they've gotten a little more agressive. Not to say everyone who's been put down is guilty of holding the attitude I described, certainly one who's being aggressive is often guilty of jumpting the gun too quickly.

The first thread: "Which Jay has the nicest body?"

The answer's Sparky anyways.

Sparky? Come on. It's Hinske, hands down. ;)

It is tiresome. It's the reason I abandoned the Blue Jays' official chatsite. So if members of the Cabal get testy about that kind of attitude invading here, I understand why. Yeah, they should probly tone it down, but it shouldn't be hard to understand why they've gotten a little more agressive. Not to say everyone who's been put down is guilty of holding the attitude I described, certainly one who's being aggressive is often guilty of jumpting the gun too quickly.

Andrew:

I agree that in order for this place to keep a high signal to noise ratio, the admins need to be vigilant. But they need to be wary of driving away people who hold different opinions, but still have something positive to contribute.

Someone commenting on the slow development of Adams and Hill is not guilty of those transgressions, and (IMO) deserves to be engaged with a little less hostility.

Hinske, hands down

Eww! Built like a tackling dummy. Yuck.

Hey Robert Dudek, I'm just reading the Box rules, man. Personal attacks are prohibited, yet you go around claiming people who disagree with you are "smokin'" and are "irritating". That's against the rules, isn't it? What are the rules? You claim that "Posts that do absolutely nothing to further discussion may also be deleted", yet let Jonny German's post about a guy's use of capital letters go by without warning (I won't even get into the Cuttlefish stuff). All I'm saying is, before you start throwing the rulebook at everyone, just remember that the rules are almost never implemented and/or taken seriously, by the people who run this site or the regular posters on it. It's just funny how you (and Jonny German) are so quick to point at the rulebook, when you both have broken rules in that very rulebook on the same day.

I will now anxiously await the "if you don't like it, leave" responses, which are laden with so much maturity, it's remarkable.

Yes, I am the voice of reason.

Rules are meant to serve those that wrote them. This isn't necessarily a fault but it's something to remember.

VoR, I think you're basically right that Robert made a comment about what types of posts will be deleted that, when read without giving him the benefit of the doubt, does suggest that it would apply to any harmless banter type post. It should be pretty obvious that this was not his intent. In any case, you're wrong when you characterize "what are you smokin" and other remarks as being personal attacks; they're just rhetorical challenges.

I will now anxiously await the "if you don't like it, leave" responses, which are laden with so much maturity, it's remarkable.

vic, I'm sorry that you feel that way. We really do mean it, though, when we encourage people not to come by if it raises their blood pressure too much. I don't want to this place to drag anyone down.

Now look. You've already been rude and insulting a number of times in complaining about people being rude and insulting. I'm not going to deal with any charges of hypocrisy; that's for everyone's own conscience (as Whitman once said, "do I contradict myself? Very well, I contradict myself. I am large, I contain multitudes.")

We are all trying to do better.