After the season the Batter's Box roster got together to discuss the season. Here's what was said in the first of the five part series:

Craig B: It was an irredeemably disastrous season which has set this team back two years, at least. None of us expected this (a few of us feared it a possibility, but even then we didn't fear it would be this bad). It was a nightmare season from the very first game.

There were a grand total of two significant bright spots this season. Dave Bush pitched very well and Jason Frasor did as well.

That's it. The rest was a disappointment.

Coach: There's no way to put a positive spin on the season, which was indeed disastrous and is certainly irredeemable. It may even have "set this team back two years" in terms of winning over large numbers of fans, but I don't believe it will affect their play in 2005 and 2006.

Needless to say, any remote chance of being a fringe 2004 contender depended on all three superstars remaining among the league's best players at their positions. They didn't necessarily have to be in the top ten again as AL MVP candidates, but they definitely had to carry the team and hope that the supporting cast was adequate. If even one of them had succumbed to injury for any length of time, a .500 season would have been an accomplishment. All three? Read the standings and weep.

I may be in the minority around here for believing in clubhouse chemistry, hitting being contagious and other so-called intangibles, but those things are as real as a fastball between the shoulder blades -- they can hurt just as much, only it's harder to shake off the effects. Whether Carlos and Vernon were playing with nagging injuries or simply out of sync at the plate back in April, others (notably Hinske and Phelps) tried too hard too pick up the power slack. By May, it was obvious that Delgado was hurting more than helping. The hitting machine of 2003 was missing its engine, and every player knew it.

They were also quite aware that Halladay wasn't right. Even before shutting it down, Doc wasn't himself. A sense of impending doom permeated the clubhouse. How could it not? Winning clubs expect to win. It's an ingrained confidence that each player develops in himself and his teammates. If you're questioning, you're doubting, which leads to losing.

Dave Till: As Craig says, irredeemably disastrous pretty much covers it. The biggest things that went wrong:

1. Josh Phelps went splat. Instead of becoming a reliable 30+ HR masher, the former BP coverboy has turned into a platoon DH at best. While no one has ever publicly admitted it, the plan was to replace Delgado with Phelps. The organization didn't really have a backup plan for first base, as everyone assumed (with some justification) that Josh was going to be The Man. Now, it will be two or three years, at least, before a comparable basher can come up through the system. Since the Jays will not pony up the cash to sign Delgado, they'll have to try to cover first base with a mix and match of spare parts.

2. Eric Hinske regressed. At one time, it looked like you could pencil Hinske in for 20+ HR and a .270 average with walks; now, it looks like he's not going to reach any of those totals. And he's locked in for three more years. As with first base, the Jays didn't really have a backup plan here, either - the farm system is stocked with outfielders and pitchers, since that's what the club seemed to need.

3. Dustin McGowan blew up. He was expected to be better than Dave Bush; now, it will be two years before he can round into anything resembling his previous form, if he ever does. This opens another hole in the starting rotation.

4. None of the imported bullpen help worked out. The Jays signed three pitchers with closer experience, and none of them proved able to close games (though Tosca can possibly be blamed a bit for this, as he tended to shuttle from one to another at two-week intervals). Of the bullpen pitchers on the 2004 staff, only Speier can be counted on to be useful at all, and he's not really a ninth-inning guy. They also might be able to reclaim Frasor with careful handling.

5. Kevin Cash proved useless with the bat. He won't even have a career as a backup catcher now.

6. Of course, all the injuries.

From a casual fan's perspective, what we're looking at is a team that is on its way to losing nearly 95 games, and is about to lose its best hitter in the offseason. I don't envy the person whose job it is to try to market the 2005 Jays.

Having said all that, there is a glimmer of hope for the future. The kids coming up seem to be able to actually play a little. Rios has a lot of potential and a broad base of skills. I'm not high on Gross, but he can do some things. Adams is playing like he belongs here. Bush is now a quality starter and has shown that he can dominate at times. I'm not sure Chacin is for real, but he and Quiroz are likely to help each other's major league chances, as they work so well together as a team. And League has a world of potential, either as a dominating closer, or as an effective starter if he can learn a new pitch or two.

Leigh: "Unless, of course, my nine all-stars fall victim to nine separate misfortunes and are unable to play tomorrow. But that will never happen. Three misfortunes, that's possible. Seven misfortunes, there's an outside chance. But nine misfortunes? I'd like to see that!"
- Mr. Burns, in the classic Simpsons episode Homer at the Bat

That sums up the Jays 2004 season. If somebody would have asked me, during Spring training, if the Jays could possibly finish last in the American League East, I'd have said no, and then quoted the above passage.

I was overflowing with optimism at the beginning of April, 2004. Was the optimism warranted or naive? I'll say warranted, as warranted as Mr. Burns' optimism in Homer at the Bat. The Jays', like the Nuclear Plant Softball Team, suffered nine separate misfortunes, the simultaneous occurrence of which is the stuff of comedic fantasy.

Here, then, are the nine separate misfortunes which kept the Jays from winning over 90 games.

Run Distribution Bad Luck: the team finished 67-94, whereas their pythagorean projection based on runs scored and allowed was 71-90. So, that's 719 runs scored, 823 allowed = 71 - 90.

Carlos Delgado: from 1999 to 2003 (inclusive), Delgado averaged 133 runs created per season. In 2004 he created 89 runs. That's a 44 run difference, 31 after removing the 13 runs contributed by Phelps, Crozier and Gomez (pro-rated to match [each making up one-third] the number of plate appearances that Delgado missed relative to his five season average). We can then do the pythagorean projection over again, with the 31 extra runs added. So, now we are at 750 runs scored, 823 allowed = 74 - 87.

Roy Halladay's Injury: using Baseball Prospectus' PRAR (pitching-only runs above replacement), Roy Halladay was better than a replacement level pitcher by 93 runs in 2002, 102 runs in 2003, and 44 runs in 2004. If 2004 had matched his established performance level, the Jays would have benefited by 54 runs (98 - 44) - we don't have to add the value of his replacements while he was injured, because this stat is above replacement level, rather than gross production (as opposed to runs created in the above Delgado analysis). So, now we are at 750 runs scored, 769 allowed = 79 - 82.

Vernon Wells' Injury and Fluke-Induced Performance Drop: using Baseball Prospectus' BRAR (batting runs above replacement player), Wells was better than a replacement level player by 51 runs in 2003, compared to 21 in 2004. That's 30 runs. So, now we are at 780 runs scored, 769 allowed = 82 - 79.

Eric Hinske's Unexpected Performance Drop: using BRAR again, Hinske was 38 runs over replacement in 2002, 15 in 2003 and, well, 0 in 2004. For the rest of the third-basemen in baseball in 2004, the stat is BRAH (batting runs above Hinske). In the interest of not being too ridiculous with this, let's just use Hinske's 2003. I did not consider Wells' 2002, which was worse than his 2003, so I will not for Hinske even though it would help my analysis [sic] here. That's 15 runs difference. So, now we are at 795 runs scored, 769 allowed = 83 - 78.

Frank Catalanotto's Injury Problems: using a three-year average BRAR for the Cat, we could have expected 22 runs over replacement; instead we got five. That's 17 runs difference. So, now we are at 812 runs scored, 769 allowed = 85 - 76.

Miguel Batista's Control Problem Aberration: using the Halladay method above, we lost out on 12 pitching runs from Batista, relative to his 2003 numbers. So, now we are at 812 runs scored, 757 allowed = 86 - 75.

The Untimely End to Pat Hengten's Career: lest you think that I am weighing his very good 2003 season too heavily, I'll use a five-year PRAR average for Hentgen. Hentgen's five-year PRAR average, previous to 2004, was 34. In 2004, it was four. That's 30 runs difference. So, now we are at 812 runs scored, 727 allowed = 89 - 72.

Josh Phelps' Unexpected Performance Drop: using a two-year average BRAR for Phelps, we could have expected 21 runs over replacement, instead we got one. I think it is safe to assume that he would not have been traded if he had performed at his 2002/2003 established performance level. That is a 20 run difference. So, now we are at 832 runs scored, 727 allowed = 91 - 70.

So there you have it, this team could have easily won 91 games. The Season From Hell was a total fluke, the product of nine separate misfortunes.

Jordan: I agree on Craig’s latter two points -- it was a season, and it was just disastrous -- but I'm not sure about irredeemable. If nothing else, a lot of players important to the franchise's future got useful experience and even exceeded expectations at times. I'd be a lot more depressed if Dave Berg had finished the season as the regular second baseman against lefties.

Thomas: I wouldn't go so far as to say the Jays have been set back two years, but I can't see this season as treading water, either. Eric Hinske took another noticable step backwards and with the amount of money we have tied up in him over the next three years, that's a worrisome sign. His defence is improving, but with an OBP of .312 and a slugging percentage under .400 that's simply not adequate for a third baseman. Hudson took a step forward, but Vernon regressed as well. I didn't expect Vernon to drop this much from last year (although I was expecting a drop) and I wasn't impressed by his approach at the plate as a whole. McGowan's injury was devastating and Peterson's collapse is worrisome, as well.

There were some big strides forward made by several players in the minors, and I agree that JP is parctiularly strong at the draft. But I don't see us at the same position we were last year.

Robert Dudek: There's at least three other positive things to add to Craig's list:

1) Russ Adams has silenced most of the doubters with his bat. He seems to be light years ahead of Chris Woodward with the bat. I'm confident that he'll be able to outhit the shortstops we've had this year.

2) The phenomenal rise of Gustavo Chacin in the second half of the season. I doubt there was a better pitcher in the Eastern League in the last few months. His two starts in Toronto bode well - I expect him to start the year in Syracuse with a June call-up if things go well.

3) The Hawaiian Punch-Out. One of the most exciting arms our system has ever produced. The difference between League and Billy Koch is the movement on his fastball (Koch had none). He'll likely need more seasoning, but if I were running the team I'd stick him in long-relief next year and let him learn at the big league level.

Craig B: Robert, I didn't count the September callups as a bright spot... I probably should have. Clearly the success of Adams, Chacin and League and flashes from Quiroz as well, are very encouraging.

Also, it's not really a "bright spot" for me when someone continues to develop as I expect him to, but clearly (to me) Orlando Hudson has turned into an elite defender at second base and has hit well.

Mike Green:Paint me with rose-coloured glasses, but I see the team at about the same place as it was at the start of the season. This season, for me, was about the development of the kids and on this point the news was mixed but on balance a little positive (with the unexpected leaps forward by Chacin and Adams being the keys). The high points have mostly been touched on, but I would add in the development of Aaron Hill. I expect the core of the infield of 2006 to be Quiroz, Hill, Adams and Hudson, and I am quite pleased by that.

---

Part II tomorrow will take a look at the team off the field.