Here is a fine piece by Tom Meagher in THT on Magglio's millions. Meagher's comments about the timing of Detroit's run at AL Central glory are especially interesting.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/gammons/story?id=1987105
More on Magglio. Peter Gammons adds his two cents (COMN). The article is dated yesterday, but I don't think anyone linked it in the roundup.

Fast forward to July 5, 2005

Alan Tramell: Hey Magglio, you look like something is bothering you when you run, are your knees sore?

Ordonez: No skip, its just my hammy, I tweaked it a bit yesterday.
-------------------------------------

Fast forward to August 5, 2005

Alan Tramell: Hey Magglio, you look like something is bothering you when you run, are your knees sore?

Ordonez: No skip, its just my quad, I tweaked it a bit yesterday.
-------------------------------------

Fast forward to September 5, 2005

Alan Tramell: Hey Magglio, you look like something is bothering you when you run, are your knees sore?

Ordonez: No skip, its just my achilles, I tweaked it a bit yesterday.
-------------------------------------

Fast forward to October 5, 2005

Ka ching, Ka ching!!

On the Jays web site ther is a poll asking who will lead the Jays in saves this year. The response is overwhelmingly in favour of Billy Koch. It seems that most Jays fans are mistaken about what role Billy will take with the Jays.

My guess is that Justin Speier will lead the team in saves.

Your ad is perfect.

http://mets.scout.com/2/350755.html
COMN for a preseason preview of the Jays.

That was a fairly positive preview of the Jays. To add my two cents:

- I would hate Josh Towers winning a spot in the rotation.
- I'm not convinced that Russ Adams and Orlando Hudson in the 1 and 2 spots of the order is a good thing.
- I have serious concerns with the Jays catching, I really hope Quiroz gets off to a fast start in Syracuse and takes over the everday job in Toronto quickly.
- Any other team have their first baseman hitting 8th?

Interesting preview!

I wonder whether it would make sense to bat Hinske second, lead the O-Dog off, and give him license to steal more. Hinske is patient at the plate, and he'll likely get more fastballs in the #2 hole.

I think Towers would be useful against certain teams. His strength: he throws strikes. His weakness: large, strong persons sometimes hit those strikes a long way. Against teams with large ballparks or less power, he could probably make quite a useful contribution. In Fenway, though, he'd get mashed.

Any other team have their first baseman hitting 8th?

I would say that these first basemen have about the same offensive expectation on their team as Hinske does with the Jays:
Tino Martinez - Yankees
Travis Lee - D Rays
Carlos Pena - Tigers
Doug Mientkiewicz - Mets
Hee Seop Choi - Dodgers
J.T. Snow - Giants
John Olerud - (if he lands somewhere)

and Hinske has at least a reasonable chance to equal the offensive output of these first basemen:
Adam LaRoche - Braves
Darrin Erstad - Angels
Chad Tracy - D'Backs
Scott Hatteberg - A's
Nick Johnson - Nat's

So, while not the ultimate answer at 1st, Hinske is not the offensive sinkhole he has been portrayed as in comparison to the current crop of first basemen. I feel that as long as Hinske does bat 8th for most of the season, the Blue Jay offense should be respectable.

Not to nit pick, but when you read the following line, you have to take the analysis with a grain of salt.

If you combine the two players’ stats, they certainly match up to the productivity of Delgado, however, neither player is the intimidating factor that Delgado was in the lineup.

As has been discussed before in this forum, you can't simply add the HR and RBI of two players and compare to them to one player, ignoring the extra lineup spot they require.

Imagine a hockey team saying that they've replaced a 50-goal scorer with five 10-goal scorers. Pretty asinine.

Imagine a hockey team saying that they've replaced a 50-goal scorer with five 10-goal scorers. Pretty asinine.

True, unless your hockey team had no other scorers. Then adding five 10-goal guys is progress.

And what if your 50-goal guy has bum knees and goes down for a month with a strained ribcage?

Imagine a hockey team saying that they've replaced a 50-goal scorer with five 10-goal scorers. Pretty asinine.

Of course you can't simply add two players together and say, "Hey, these guys combined will do what Delgado did." However, and not to pick nits, Chuck, but we should apply parallel structure here with respect to your hockey analogy. To follow your argument, what you should say is, "Imagine a hockey team saying that they've replaced a 50-goal scorer with TWO 25-goal scorers."

To follow your argument, what you should say is, "Imagine a hockey team saying that they've replaced a 50-goal scorer with TWO 25-goal scorers."

Fair enough. But it doesn't move me off my position. No one should ever compare Delgado with Hillenbrand+Koskie. It should always be, at the very least, Delgado+replacement-level-player vs. Hillenbrand+Koskie. (And we're just talking performance here, as the author was, not performance per dollar.)

The unspoken 0 HR, 0 RBI performance of the somebody in the unspoken Delgado+somebody formula is a tad irksome.

It should always be, at the very least, Delgado+replacement-level-player vs. Hillenbrand+Koskie.

Isn't it essentially Delgado+Hinske vs. Hinske+Koskie? Coincidentally, Hinske was about replacement level last year as well!

Isn't it essentially Delgado+Hinske vs. Hinske+Koskie? Coincidentally, Hinske was about replacement level last year as well!

I'd say it's closer to Delgado+"Pile of Bad DHs" vs. Koskie+Hillenbrand.

Hinske is not the offensive sinkhole he has been portrayed as in comparison to the current crop of first basemen

I think your overestimating Hinske's production. Hinske had a .688 OPS last season, now take a look at the players you've listed and there OPS from last year:

Tino Martinez - .823
Travis Lee - .807 (2004 stats because he missed last season)
Carlos Pena - .810
Doug Mientkiewicz - .676
Hee Seop Choi - .819
J.T. Snow - .958
John Olerud - .733 - and he won't be any teams #1 guy in 2005

and Hinske has at least a reasonable chance to equal the offensive output of these first basemen:
Adam LaRoche - .821
Darrin Erstad - .746
Chad Tracy - .750
Scott Hatteberg - .787
Nick Johnson - .758

Therefore the only real comparable hitter was Mientkiewicz, but the defencive differences between him and Hinske are huge and Mienntkiewicz was playing hurt last season. Now there is a chance that Hinske will become a much improved hitter in 2005, howevever I'm not sure I could justify this with anything other than hope.

Tino Martinez - Yankees
Travis Lee - D Rays
Carlos Pena - Tigers
Doug Mientkiewicz - Mets
Hee Seop Choi - Dodgers
J.T. Snow - Giants
John Olerud - (if he lands somewhere)

Hinske last season VORP = -2.2. (Hey does anyone else ever notice that VORP doesn't seem to be constant? It seems like a couple of times a year, the baseline moves.) He was at 3B, and I'd expect that it takes less offensive production there to rack up VORP than at 1B.

The other guys on your list?

Tino 31.8
Lee -3.1 (In 20 PA, during which he was apparently injured)
Pena 26.9
Minky 3.0
Choi 27.5
Snow 45.1
Olerud 6.3

The only guys on that list who are remotely comparable to Hinske in terms of VORP (keeping in mind that I believe replacement level is higher for 1B) are Minky and Olerud. One of them was released mid-season, while the other was essentially a closer at 1B. I know you're speaking to expectations...but still.

This is not positive.

Ryan, i completely agree. I've seen a lot of people say the jays are gonna lose more games this year, and say we can't replace Carlos production and then quote his three year averages. All the Jays need to replace are Carlos 2004 numbers and the many DH's numbers from last year. Can shea and koskie replace carlos+dh of 2004? probably. Hopefully, the Jays can have a healthier year next year and with a slighlty improved offense(fair and balanced, thanks fox news) and a more than a little improved pitching staff the jays can take a big step this year.

...the jays can take a big step this year.

Towards what? Mediocrity? The only position players who I can reasonably foresee being starters on a contending Jays team are Hudson, Adams and Wells. Everyone else is a space filler/future bench player.

This is a treading water season, albeit likely one with more wins.

The only position players who I can reasonably foresee being starters on a contending Jays team are Hudson, Adams and Wells. Everyone else is a space filler/future bench player.

Even Rios?

"Imagine a hockey team saying that they've replaced a 50-goal scorer with TWO 25-goal scorers."

I agree but think it actually should be: "replaced a 50 goal scorer with two 25 goal scorers and the flexibility to improve the team."

If you have not won with your 50 goal scorer and his contract will prevent you from improving the rest of the team, you are doomed to mediocrity.

Everyone else is a space filler/future bench player

Uh...
How about Rios, Bush, Halladay, Speier, Koskie, GQ, League, Lily, ...

Tyler, nice post!

I used the common man's OPS and you used VORP, but I points were similar.

Tyler, this team has a lot of young guys, and a lot of young pitchers that will at the very least get a chance to show twhat they can do in the bullpen. I think guys like adams and league need a full rookie year to show what they can do, and guys like hudson, Rios, and bush need another full year in the bigs to to take another step in the right direction. Sure, we have some place holders aswell, but they aren't named vernon, roy, corey, or ted. You can argue there a lot of things that could go wrong this season, just like last year. But there are also a lot of things that COULD go right for this team this year, and that hasn't been the case for more than a couple of years.

Imagine a hockey team saying that they've replaced a 50-goal scorer with five 10-goal scorers. Pretty asinine.

Reminds me of when Nolan Ryan left the then-California Angels for the Astros as a free agent for a then-staggering $1M contract. He had been 16-14 for the Angels in '79 and I can't remember if it was manager Jim Fregosi or owner Gene Autry or wheover the GM was at the time, famously said "All we need to do is find a couple of guys who can go 8-7 and we'll replace him fine."

That worked out pretty well for them.

The major problem is getting any of the five (10 goal scoring hockey players) to play real hockey this season.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/B/BBO_TIGERS_CUBS_TRADE?SITE=OHTOL&SECTION=SPORTS&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT
A TRADE! Not a Blue Jays trade, and no big name involved, but still ... A TRADE!

Kyle Farnsworth to the Tigers. COMN.

http://toronto.bluejays.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/tor/fan_forum/swing.jsp
Looks like the Jays have their own version of fan fest. COMN for details.

http://toronto.bluejays.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/tor/news/tor_news.jsp?ymd=20050208&content_id=940701&vkey=news_tor&fext=.jsp
Spencer Fordin's newest 'Around the Horn' it up. Today: Bullpen.

http://www.canadasdebate.com
Hey, according to that scouting report on the Jays, Alex Rios only had a brief tenure with the Jays in 2004. Does anyone else think that this isn't a fair assesment?

Ah, yes, statistics to back up one's position. I've been frequenting battersbox long enough to know this.

Hinske at first base this year for the Jays: Demarco and Tyler have put forth good and reasonable stats to show how terrible he stacks up against the other 1st basemen. How about 3 year OPS splits? It's not as easy to draw exactly the same conclusion.

Choi: .785
Erstad: .706
Hatteberg: .772
Lee: .759
Mientkiewicz: .765
Pena: .784

Hinske: .766

LaRoche and Tracy were rookies, so we can't look at them over 3 years.
Tino, Johnson, and Snow were all around or over .800, so they do not compare.

So, my position isn't quite as strong as I thought it was, but, looking at 3 year splits shows that Hinske could be the worst offensive 1st baseman (but not by a lot) or he could be closer to the middle with a year slightly over his 3 year average.

While it may be true that Hinske will continue to slide from a very bad 2004 and Choi and Pena will continue to improve on their .800+ OPS seasons, they may all tend more toward the mean in 2005. I prefer to predict the latter.

I got my copy of the Street & Smith's Baseball preview for 2005. I have gotten this every year for as long as I can remember and my dad got it every year as a kid as well. I really enjoy reading the team previews and the fantasy run down. It helped me win my league last year.

Anyway, they have the Jays pegged for 3rd in the AL East this year. Last year they had them 4th so apparently this team is better then last years team going into spring training. The wirter is really high on the defence of this team and is convinced Roy Halladay and Vernon Wells will have carbon copy years of 2003. I don't expect that much from them but I think they'll do better this year.

A question, when do tickets for the home opener go on sale? Anyone else read Street and Simth's?

sweat, call me a downer but I don't agree with you're assertion that the Jays have "more than a little improved [their] pitching staff".

I think at this point in the off-season it's important to compare what we thought we had exactly one year ago to what we think we have this year.

I mean I'm aware that Doc could be Cy LeRoy again, but you're aware he could pitch like he did in July /August - which is to say not much at all.

Sure Hentgen's gone, but is it obvious that Towers is better? Pat finished 2003 on a very strong note, so his 2004 looked (one year ago) to be better than Towers' 2005 looks.

Schoe is here but isn't he just going to perform the way we thought (one year ago) that Kerry Ligtenberg would.

Admittedly the flotsam of Twins castoffs won't be back and we'll bring up some hot prospects but TINSTAAPP and we've still got Glynn, Koch and Miller floating around.

I'm as optimistic about League as the next guy but if he does as well as Frasor did last year I'd be pleasantly surprised. I expect Frasor to revert to the mean.

I think our collective expectations for MBatista are a lot lower for this year than they were last year.

Bush and Lilly should pitch at the same level, with Bush pitching more IP but probably offer the same overall positive contribution.

More Speier will be a positive, but people forget that Terry Adams was actually a net positive to the Jays (+5 RSAA)in 2004 in Toronto.

So I guess what I'm trying to say is that if you expect no injuries then of course we'll be better, but that's probably a bit unrealistic. Getting more Speier and League will help for sure but the rest of the staff looks awfully similar to me.

I love our offensive depth (we've got good backups/platoons at every position) and I expect great improvement in the W column but still think our pitching is quite thin.

SF seemed kind of dismissive of Chad Gaudin. In my mind, he's kind of a hot pitching prospect, and not just someone who may be able to salvage some relief work out of the twisted wreckage of a fading career. Opinions?

I'm sorry you got that impression, Matthew -- I'm not dismissive of him in the least. His situation will get aired a little more fully when I talk to him late next week.

I dont expect no injuries, I'm just hopeful the injuries wont hit our top 3 performers, like they did last year.

http://toronto.bluejays.mlb.com/NASApp/mlb/team/roster_nri.jsp?c_id=tor
I didn't notice this before, but the Jays' NRIs are listed on their official site. COMN. Nothing new; no sign of Kevin Frederick. He was non-tendered back in December and I forget if anything has happened with him since then. Anyone?

Matthew: SF seemed kind of dismissive of Chad Gaudin.

Fordin: He was among the youngest players in the big leagues the last two seasons, so there's still a chance he can turn into a productive reliever.

I got the same impression as Matthew from that line.

I had more to say, but Fordin clarified his position while I was typing. Briefly, he was rushed, called up to the majors after all of three starts above A-ball, and he started 2004 with the big club when he should have been in Durham.

I'm not dismissive of him in the least.

Okay. I guess that one sentence must have sounded differently to me as I was reading it from how it did to you as you were writing it.

Gaudin will be 22 next month, and was rushed by the D-Rays (what else is new?). Here is his minor league record. One would normally worry about the increase his HR rate last year in Durham, but it's a very short poke to right-field there. I'd bet that was a problem for him; it would be great to have home/road stats to check.

Anyways, I imagine that Gaudin will start the season in Syracuse, and the real question is whether it will be in a starting or relief role. I am hoping that he makes the rotation. My rule of thumb is 30 starts in AA/AAA before a starter is considered for a major league role, and Gaudin has had 10 so far.

While Gaudin is a good prospect he does need to work on his pitches, specifically the non-slider pitches. I never expected him to make the Jays and always assumed he would be back in the minors for more work.

I'm suprised that JP didn't show some interest in Farnsworth with all that Rogers loot lying around (I guess I don't know for a fact that JP wasn't interested).

The Tigers didn't give up much for a flamethrowing, 10K/IP relief guy.

In fact, even prior to the bump in budget - I think JP had some room in his budget to take on some salary.

While Gaudin is a good prospect he does need to work on his pitches, specifically the non-slider pitches. I never expected him to make the Jays and always assumed he would be back in the minors for more work.

Oh, me too. The roster's pretty full, and I agree that he needs a bit more minor-league marinating before he goes back on the grill. I tend to think the same way about Brandon League.

Blue, Farnsworth is a free agent after this year. Why give up anything if you are not going to contend anyway?

My rule of thumb is 30 starts in AA/AAA before a starter is considered for a major league role

Shall we call this the David Bush Rule?

Ducey - unfortunately, that could be said of the Shea Hillenbrand trade as well. I just think Farnsworth could have been a useful piece in the bullpen, especially given some of the comments above by others about letting League and Gaudin marinate in the minors.

Ryan B, yes also a fan of Street and Smiths, also pick up sporting news and athlon every year, S and S was the only one to see any light for the Jays, One annual graded JP towards the bottom of all GM's

Shall we call this the David Bush Rule?

It probably has its origins in a Bill James' comment about the Jays (or was it the Mariners?) rushing their starters in the early 90s. I am not sure that he said exactly that. Anyways, I was quite happy that the Jays followed the rule pretty much to the T in Bush's case.

Blue, I agree on Hillenbrand and on the necessity of sending some guys to AAA but I think Hillenbrand was a stop gap move (less risky than handing the job to rookies Crozier or Hattig). Besides why make that mistake twice?

With Farnsworth because he is a bullpen guy there are a lot of options to get you to mid season when Gaudin and League ought to be fully marinated.

Farnsworth would be a one year rental for 2005. Maybe the Jays can pick him up as a free agent in 2006 if League, Frasor, Speier, Chulk and Gaudin don't continue to develop. If they do develop, you won't need him.

Anyways, I was quite happy that the Jays followed the rule pretty much to the T in Bush's case.

Let's hope there's "A" similar application with Francisco Rosario and we'll wait and "C" what they do with Banks. (That's three of the top four pitching prospects with middle initials in place of full middle names...must be a record. League is the fourth one, and he's Brandon Paul, so no go there.)

On a related note, take a look at the Double-A lines for two pitchers:

Player A: 77 IP   14 GS   19 BB   73 K   26 ER   73 H 
Player B: 77 IP   14 GS   19 BB   72 K   28 ER   78 H

You can't get much closer than that. Player A is the 30 Start Wizard, David T. Bush. Player B is also a Blue Jays prospect, and he put up those numbers at a younger age (28 months younger) than Bush. I knew "B" was good, but this path illustrates further the impact he might have had on the Blue Jays this year. You all saw Bush pitch in Toronto -- imagine two Dave Bushes in the rotation, both ready to go for 2005.

but I think Hillenbrand was a stop gap move (less risky than handing the job to rookies Crozier or Hattig)

Sorry to rehash this, but the DH job -- I assume you mean DH -- would have been Catalanotto's. At least that's what should have happened. Gross would have been in left field, and he's a lot more major-league ready than Crozier or Hattig. Especially Hattig. A stopgap move does not, by nature, block a top prospect from 500 ML at bats, which is what Gross needs this year.

http://bluejays.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
Though I like Farnsworth I don’t think we need another RHP in the pen. We’ve got lots of those. Also, he wouldn’t come that cheap as he’ll make just short of $2 million this year. We’ve got some good young right handed arms we need to figure out before we sign guys like Farnsworth.

With regards to Gaudin, I think he was a nifty little pickup for a player (Cash) we had no interest in keeping. He’s only going to be 22 this year and a full season at AAA might do him real well. His numbers up until he was rushed to the bigs in 2003 were pretty good. At his age I think he’s got a chance to be something pretty good.

Finally, I don’t think Hinske will be a problem at first that long. I don’t think there is any way he finishes the season with us. He’s a third basemen and that is where he should be playing and we’ve now got Koskie for the next couple of years. I bet he’s gone by the trading deadline if not before. We can only hope he gets off to a hot start so he brings us back some loot.

It’s too bad. I loved his fiery attitude when he came up.

I am wondering whether Farnsworth has been picked up in case Urbina can't hold the same role as he was also expected to last year, due to the unsettling family situation in Venezuela.

Or maybe Farnsworth has been pegged to replace Esteban Yan.

I don't know if I see him as being an investment for the Jays to pursue right at this moment -- it's difficult to see how we are going to do, and just because we've got cash right now doesn't mean we should spend $2 MIL on Kyle Farnsworth. He seems like more of the type of guy we pick up in June, if we are at the point where we are going to get a lot better with the help of someone of his calibre.

What I don't understand is why the heck the Cubs are jettisoning his services. Salary dump? I don't seem as being too poor, as they are willing to eat a large chunk of Sosa's salary -- seems questionable given their no true closer situation.

More Speier will be a positive, but people forget that Terry Adams was actually a net positive to the Jays (+5 RSAA)in 2004 in Toronto.

RSAA doesn't tell you that Terry Adams allowed 15 of 29 inherited runners to score. That's 52%, compared to the league average of 32%. That's 6 runs worse than average right there.

Kevin Frederick. He was non-tendered back in December and I forget if anything has happened with him since then. Anyone?

I also have him as still a free agent.

Best remaining free agent now that Ordonez and Delgado have signed? Miguel Cairo! Or I suppose you could argue for Johnny O or Brad Fullmer...

I guess the difference in my thinking is that a stopgap move (and I agree that Farnsworth would be a stopgap) is not necessarily a mistake. You still want to try to win games at the ML level, while you continue to develope your young talent. I think that Farnsworth would help at the ML level more than say Chulk or Miller or Towers or Arnold or the other options available to the Jays.

And, as a bonus if he is a FA at the end of the year, JP could pick up some draft picks if he signs eleswhere. Also, if League or Rosario or Gaudin are ready at the allstar break, we can trade Farnsworth for some other organizational need. Worst case scenario, the Jays non-tender him next off-season and all they are out is his salary for one year (approx. $2.5M).

http://bluejays.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
By the way, has anyone heard any news on Ligtenberg’s health? I know he was really bad last year but those numbers are clearly out of line with his career. I thought he was a great signing last year and that he’d provide 120 solid innings in 2004 and 2005. Even with his 6.38ERA from last year the guys got a career ERA of 3.57. He really could be a x-factor in the BP if he’s over his health issues.

Correction, plus the Jays would also be out the prospects traded for Farnsworth.

But all the Tigers gave up were 3 iffy prospects, which I'm sure that the Jays could have matched.

Who would you rather have, Farnsworth at $2 million or Schoeneweiss at $2.5? Farnsworth has the reputation for being a head case, and I wonder how much consideration that would merit in the front office.

http://bluejays.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
Good point on the either Farnsworth or Schoeneweiss comment. I'd take Farnsworth in a heartbeat. There is just no way the Schoenweiss signing was a good idea. They REALLY overpaid for a lefty specialist.

How about Rios, Bush, Halladay, Speier, Koskie, GQ, League, Lily, ...

I doubt Lily will be here when the Jays contend-based on the price of pitchers, if he puts up a season like last year, he's going to be looking to get paid in the offseason.

Rios was an omission. Although I'm not sold on him, some of the really smart baseball people here have indicated that his swing last year seemed to be designed to hit groundballs. If he can get more of a power swing, then he may well be a useful regular.

GQ is going to Syracuse, based on everything I've heard.

Bush, Halladay, Speier and Lily...note that I said position players, although I suspect Speier will be gone along with Lily when the Jays contend.

Koskie is a space filler. We'll see if he's the Jays regular 3B when they contend. I don't expect him to be.

But there are also a lot of things that COULD go right for this team this year, and that hasn't been the case for more than a couple of years.

2003.

H Winfield Teut: When and where did u get the Athlon aunnual? I've been looking for it everywhere. That and Street & Smith are a spring training tradition for me.

http://bluejays.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
The interesting thing about 2003 is how the heck we won so many games:

Pitching:
Roy Halladay – Nasty
Cory Little – 192 innings of 5.75 ERA
Escobar – 180 innings 4.29 ERA
Hendrickson – 158 innings 5.51 ERA
Sturtze – 89 innings 5.91
A. Lopez – 73 innings 3.42
Towers – 64 innings 4.48
Pete Walker – 55 innings 4.88
Doug Davis – 54 innings 5.00

The list goes on and on. I mean, outside of Halladay we were awful.

On the hitting side of things, Delgado, Wells, Catalanotto and Myers were all pretty good or very good but there were also some regulars like Reed Johnson, Woodward, Bordick, Orlando Hudson and Hinske who didn’t put up very good numbers.

In 2005 I think we’d all agree the bullpen “should” be better, the starting pitcher “should” be a lot better and the hitting may not score 894 runs again but they probably won’t only score 719 like they did last year. Plus, we should be a plus defensive team.

I’m not saying we should be putting the bubbly on ice. But, with the potential of an impact trade in the near future using the new found cash we could be an interesting team.

Just got Athlons at a local ma and pa magazine store, the chains here like Borders and Hastings don't get them for awhile, Walmart may even beat them.

Ryan .B., tickets go on sale beginning at 9:30 a.m. at Blue Jays Fan Fest on February 26th, at the Eaton Centre.

Terry Adams was actually a net positive to the Jays

Sorry, statistics or not, IMO and many others, I'll never believe that Terry Adams was a net positive to the Jays in any way.

Sorry, statistics or not, IMO and many others, I'll never believe that Terry Adams was a net positive to the Jays in any way.

John Hattig says hello.

I think at this point in the off-season it's important to compare what we thought we had exactly one year ago to what we think we have this year.

Why would you do that? I mean I suppose if you were comparing how good people are predicting it would be useful. But we now *know* what we had last year. Why would we compare what we have (or think we have) now to what we thought last off-season when the results are already in? We liked Hentgen last year, he didnt perform up to expectations, therefore we should expect similar from a guy we like this off-season (ie Towers)? That doesnt make any sense to me.

I dont see the use in comparing Towers now to Hentgen c. Feb 2004, we should be comparing Towers expected performace in 2005 to Hentgen's actual performance over the whole 2004 season. And even your own comparison doesnt hold true because Bush wasnt expected to be on the team in 2004.

There is one reliever who I would LOVE to have on the Jays and thats Scot Shields.

I assume hes going into the setup role in Anahiem now that K-rod is moving to the Closer spot... but it would be nice to land him.

I will.

Prior to the "closer" experiment (Math-ew Le-Croy clapclap clapclapclap,) Terry was easily our best reliver, and many Bauxites were actually clamoring for him to be made closer. Their wish was granted, he blew about 5 games, and his reputation was tarnished. After the experiment, he was an ok pitcher but nothing great. I can certainly see how he was a net positive.

Okay, all you guys are whining that we overpaid for Scott Schoenweiss. I ask you people....what was the alternative?? He has proven that he can get lefties out, I have personally seen him pitch countless times. He was miscast and underapprecitaed in Anaheim and Chicago. This guy is not a starter. He is a LOOGY. Other than Steve Kline I cannot think of anyone the guys could have picked up better. I will bodly predict SS will have a solid year in Toronto and earn his contract. Lord knows, had we had a LOOGY last year we would have won more ballgames. Some people need to stop judging people, and wait till they step on the field and pitch a season before they call somebody a bad signing. Just please let the guys play the game!

"wait till they step on the field and pitch a season before they call somebody a bad signing."

But if we do that, then some of the high-horse posters will yell at us for being whining bandwagoners that use hindsight!

RSAA doesn't tell you that Terry Adams allowed 15 of 29 inherited runners to score. That's 52%, compared to the league average of 32%. That's 6 runs worse than average right there.

I don't like the use of the inherited runner % stat in a sample size of 29. That's like evaluating a hitter on the % of 29 on base runners he drove in. It can show that he was hot or cold for that stretch but I don't feel it offers us any truth about how good or bad a player really is.

If we look at the top inherited runner % leaders year to year, do they remain consistent? Does it fluctuate as much as say batting average with runners in scoring position?

Okay, all you guys are whining that we overpaid for Scott Schoenweiss. I ask you people....what was the alternative??

One obvious alternative was John Halama. Signed with the Red Sox for a year at a million dollars. Just as good against lefties as Shoenewiess and both pitchers suck against righthanded batters making them poor starting or long relief options. No extra year to commit to and much lower dollars per year. The Jays probably couldn't have gotten him as cheap as the Red Sox did but even if you outbid them by $500K to $700K you're still cheaper than Scho and only one year.

Were there other alternatives? I'm not sure. Part of the front office's job is to fill these smaller roles for small costs. The Red Sox were able to do it though they admittedly have much more appeal to all tiers of free agents. But I'd rather save that $4.5 million over two years to put into offence or starting pitching than to get a pitcher whose only strong role is facing one or two lefthanded batters per game. If the second year of the contract did not exist I'd still say Scho was overpaid but I wouldn't have as much of a problem with the move. Unless Scho adds a pitch that he can deal to righties this isn't an optimal use of funds. For Ligtenberg and Scho combined you can get into the bidding on a $4 to $5 million closer.

http://bluejays.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
Yes, SS has proven he can get lefties out and it seems like he was miscast and maybe underappreciated in his other locations. If he's used as a LOOGY this year then I think he'll succeed. And that's a good thing as he's our only lefty in the pen. That's not my point though. My point is they overpaid for him to be a LOOGY.

Not sure you can compare him to Kline either. Kline has killed lefties and been very good on righties in his career. If the Orioles only use him against left handed hitters than they are wasting his talent. Kline is one of the best relievers in the game. He's not a LOOGY.

Alternatives? How about Jason Kershner. Was he bad in his 22 innings last year? Yup. But, over the past three years he's held lefties to .240/.301/.359. That's pretty darn good. Plus, he wouldn't cost much more than $500,000. And I bet one could find several other players miscast as relievers who should probably be a LOOGY.

John Hattig says hello.

True, Hattig is the result of Adams' departure, however it was J.P. that made the positive out of the negative.

Apparently, there was an interview between Paul Godfrey and Chuck Swirsky (I know, but an interview nonetheless) on the FAN today. As anyone could've predicted, not alot came out of it, except that concession prices will go down next year and Godfrey offered Delgado a position inside the office, after his career. Carlos emailed later to say that his doors are always open.

Alternatives? How about Jason Kershner. Was he bad in his 22 innings last year? Yup. But, over the past three years he's held lefties to .240/.301/.359. That's pretty darn good. Plus, he wouldn't cost much more than $500,000. And I bet one could find several other players miscast as relievers who should probably be a LOOGY.

How about this guy? Was he bad in his 11 innings last year? Yep. But, over the past three years he's held lefties to .240 / .314 / .342. That's pretty darn good. Plus, he wouldn't cost much more than $500,000. (I'll stop)

Kershner was good for 50 innings (out of his career 100 innings).

As for the bargain bin lefthanded relievers (cheaper than SS's 2.7 million):

Wilson Alvarez (2 years, 4 million)
Rheal Cormier (2 years, 5.25 million)
Pedro Feliciano (Japan, 735K)
John Franco (1 year, 700K)
Mark Guthrie (minor league deal with Tampa)
Kent Merker (2 years, 2.6 million)
Mike Myers (1 year, 600 grand)
C.J. Nitkowski (minor league deal with the Twins)
Tommy Phelps (minor league deal with the Brewers)
Buddy Groom (minor league deal with the Yankees)

Now, are any of those better options than Schoeneweis? And is it that bad to be paying a LOOGY upwards of two million? Given the options, maybe not.

I heard that interview, it wasnt bad. Mostly because The Swirzk just opened the phones and let the callers ask Godfrey the questions. Much much better than actually interviewing Godfrey himself.

Anyway not much new, Godfrey said that one of the reasons for the base cut-outs instead of a dirt infield was that they talked to people in Tampa who felt that the dirt infield made the ball extremely unpredictable if it hit the infield/outfield seam which the Jays didnt like very much. As well Godfrey mentioned that they Jays had been pressuring the Dome owners to imrpove the concessions for some time now as they felt they were way way substandard. Now that the Jays own the Dome it's most definitely on their 'to do' list.

Only other I can think of is that in Godfrey's opinion Speier will start the year as closer and Towers/Chacin will battle for the 5th starter spot. Of course that's not his decision and spring training hasnt even started so take it for what it's worth.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1987980
In other news, San Francisco has been awarded the 2007 All-Star Game (COMN). With Pittsburgh hosting the game in 2006, this will be the first time the game will be played in the same league in back-to-back years since 1952-1953.*

*During the four year period in which there were two All-Star Games played per year, there were two years where one league hosted both games (NL in 1959 and AL in 1960). They still alternated each year, however.

Now, are any of those better options than Schoeneweis? And is it that bad to be paying a LOOGY upwards of two million? Given the options, maybe not.

Perhaps Schoeneweis is getting more than he's worth, but I'll be shocked if he's used as a LOOGY this year.

First, I can't imagine the Jays paying that much for a specialist - a true LOOGY can be found cheaper than that. Second, Schoenweis has been effective when used as a reliver. It's his work as a starter which has made his splits look worse.

I'd bet he average at least 1 inning per appearance.

My point was, that beggars can't be choosers and we can't be so damn cheap when it comes to one of our glaring weaknesses. Sure we could sign some journeyman or a guy who's been released 4 times in 2 years, but what are we really accomplishing? We took a shot at Schoenweiss because he has a decent upsize, and he just plain can get out lefties. Have we gotten so obsessed with cost, that we compromise our sanity? Sure maybe we did give SS a few thousand more than his stats indicate. But if we don't get him, again, we miss a chance to really get somebody. I think Schoenweiss will be fine and have a solid few years in Toronto, and people will forget that we signed him for a tad too much.

Corrections

decent "upside"

and i shouldn't have said compromise our "sanity"
i should have said compromise our ability to get a guy that could really help us, instead of being too cost cautious.

I don't like the use of the inherited runner % stat in a sample size of 29.

In general, I agree with you that it's far too small of a sample. But if you're talking about what Terry Adams contributed to Toronto, it is what it is, it's all we've got, and it says he stunk. Citing his RSAA is not more insightful - that disregards inherited runners altogether.

If we look at the top inherited runner % leaders year to year, do they remain consistent?

I doubt it. One of the major difficulties in evaluating relievers is that a full season of relief pitching is usually in the 75 IP range, and that's not a big enough sample. In fact, Adams' inherited runners scored rate is a good example. For his career he has allowed 31% to score, right on league average, but 2004 in Toronto it was 52%. Did JP make a bad decision to sign Adams, did Adams randomly forget how to pitch, or was it mostly just bad luck for everybody involved?

I think Schoenweiss will be fine and have a solid few years in Toronto, and people will forget that we signed him for a tad too much.

I'm hoping you're right, Pete. However, I remain skeptical given these points:

1) It's no secret that Schoeneweis would prefer to be a starter, regardless of his less-than-impressive numbers in that role.

2) Schoeneweis has signed with a team that doesn't yet have a proven 5th starter.

Although JP made it clear to Schoeneweis when signing him that the intent was to use him out of the bullpen, I'd be willing to bet that he and his agent are thinking that when the Jays struggle with the bottom end of their rotation, ol' Schoewie will be given the nod, which is the actual (if somewhat ulterior) motive behind his signing with the Jays.

Now, before you all start screaming at me, I don't personally think the Jays are going to have trouble with the 5th starter spot, it's pretty clear they've got some good depth and a couple of different options there before giving the ball to SS. I'd also like to be wrong about Schoeneweis' motives for signing with the Jays; as I've said before I think he'll be very effective in middle relief if that's what he's happy doing in Toronto.

I just have this nasty habit of always looking at the darker side of human nature first. :)

ol' Schoewie will be given the nod, which is the actual (if somewhat ulterior) motive behind his signing with the Jays.

And I think it's possible that this is one of the reasons why he cost so much. He's not just a LOOGY, even if the stats indicate that that might be what he's best at or where he should be used. He is also a possible second long-man in the bullpen and/or an emergency 6th or 7th starter. Even if he is rather unspectacular in that role he'll probably be a better choice as an emergency starter than Jason Kershner.

Godfrey offered Delgado a position inside the office, after his career. Carlos emailed later to say that his doors are always open.

Thats an interesting tidbit. Thanks for noting that VBF.

I kind of thought there was a bit of an afinity between Delgado and Godfrey. There was a lot of discussion about Godfrey getting involved in the negotiation. I think Godfrey is a net asset to the team. He brings a human touch to the club as opposed to the more mercinary approach of JPR.

Maybe he's just a pro exec, but none-the-less, that is a fine way to end a professional relationship. My hats of to Godfrey on that one, he has softened this cynic some.

I think Ryan C and Parker sumed up my thoughts on Schoeneweis pretty nicely. Said it better than I could too.;)

Lets get our definitions straight. A LOOGY is a term used to identify left-handed hurlers who can only get left-handed batters out. Unfortunately most LOOGYS are limited to only one batter as they struggle to get out righties.

Here's the R/L OPS splits of all Toronto relievers in 2004 who faced over 100 batters per side.

Speier .556/.820
Chulk .620/.905
Miller .763/1.091
Frasor .706/.699
Ligtenburg .773/.938

Clearly most Jay pitchers, with the exception of Frasor, struggled with lefties. Somebody who is consistently good against both R/L would a lot of value for this team.

Here's the R/L splits of a guy named Schoeneweis from 2003 , when he was used exclusively( and finally used properly) as a
reliever, 571/.703. He's devastating against lefties, yet still fairly effective against righties. He profiles well as a pitcher who can face more than one batter.

However, I remain skeptical given these points:

1) It's no secret that Schoeneweis would prefer to be a starter, regardless of his less-than-impressive numbers in that role.

2) Schoeneweis has signed with a team that doesn't yet have a proven 5th starter.

Although JP made it clear to Schoeneweis when signing him that the intent was to use him out of the bullpen, I'd be willing to bet that he and his agent are thinking that when the Jays struggle with the bottom end of their rotation, ol' Schoewie will be given the nod, which is the actual (if somewhat ulterior) motive behind his signing with the Jays.

See, I look at it the opposite way. There's no need for Schoeneweis to have an ulterior motive in this situation. Why?

Because:

1) If Schoeneweis had wanted to start somewhere, he certainly could've held out until some team offered him a contract as a starter. He was pretty good last year before he was injured.

2) Virtually everyone is in agreement that the Jays overpaid for Schoeneweis, in both years and money.

3) Players always go after the money. (Well, almost always. There's the occasional case of a cheap "I want a ring, call Steinbrenner" contract, or a Barry Larkin type deal. But those are pretty rare, and context specific) In most cases, no matter what a player is publically saying (about respect, a commitment to winning, a desire to be in Miami, a desire to close, etc) it's about the money. Change positions? No problem. Throw me in the bullpen? Okay. What, your team went 67 - 94? Well, maybe next year.

I really don't see why we need to look at Schoeneweis as having these Machiavellian ambitions to capitalize on Josh Towers' level of suckiness and sneak his way into starting. Given a choice between starting and a bigger contract, he took the bigger contract. Who wouldn't? He also got a nice bonus of reuniting with the tattoo-worthy Billy Koch. What's not to like about the situation?

(Now, that being said, I wouldn't be surprised if Scott started complaining if Batista repeated his August 2004 numbers, and Towers . . . was Towers, and Chacin was in AAA. But in that case, it might be a legitimate complaint. Again, I don't see why, if Schoenweis wanted to start so badly, he'd join the Jays, who specficially said "we don't want you to start, here, take this pile of money and don't complain about being in the bullpen" He could've said no, and signed a one year deal in . . . I dunno, Tampa, if he wanted to start so badly. )

(And I never should've used LOOGY above. Obviously Schoeneweis can get through an inning (or two) with no problems. I was thinking of de los Santos when I said that)

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=citadel-2_350729_325&prov=citadel&type=lgns
COMN for a Spring Training Preview on the Jays, the 1st edition...on the Catchers.

Totally off topic, I just realised that Greg Maddux will likely notch his 3000th strike out this season.

Looking at that preview at the Ny site I found out that there is a new highest paid player in baseball...and he plays for the Jays!!

"RHP Billy Koch (free agent – 1 year, $900,000 thousand); "

$900,000 thousand?!?! That's 900 million per year!

How much is that per save? 450 million?