Note: The following took place prior to the World Series.
Pistol: The final four teams left in the playoffs this year ranked 1-2 in the NL and 1-3 in the AL in ERA. Only the Cardinals were an above average scoring team. Is a low scoring environment a new trend or an aberration?
If it is a new trend are the Jays positioned well for this and/or should it significantly alter their offseason plans? Said another way, most Jays fans, and the GM himself, have said they want 'two scary bats', but is it more important to secure the best pitching you can in light of the playoffs this year?
Magpie: I was thinking this very thing after the first round, when the Angels and White Sox dispatched the Yankees and the Red Sox. If it were true, it would certainly be good news for Toronto. But I doubt it means anything. The Yankees and Red Sox were among the four AL teams left standing, after all.
Further complicating the issue is the probability that while good pitching of any kind is good pitching during the season, that's not so true in the post-season. A staff like Houston, with five extremely good pitchers, is probably better equipped to cope with the post-season schedule than a team with a deep and solid staff but no real out and out stars. (Also see the 1987 Twins and the 2004 Cardinals.)
Jordan: I think the Jays should continue to stock up on offence. Their crying need at the moment is power: they finished 10th in the AL in SLG and 11th in the AL in homers (league-leading Texas had almost exactly twice as many round-trippers as the Jays did). They also had a mediocre running game (8th in steals, 10th in SB%) that's unlikely to get better in 2006. The only reason they finished 5th in runs scored was a 5th-place OBP and a series of blowouts -- as we've discussed elsewhere, the Jays' runs-scored total is disproportionate to their actual performance. If they were to return the same offence in 2006, their RS totals would sink to a much more realistic level.
The Blue Jays need a major offensive infusion just to reach league-average levels. They could add a Burnett, Washburn and Ryan to the staff and hope that, like the Angels, White Sox and Astros, they could scratch out enough 3-2 wins to make the playoffs with an unexciting offence. But even those teams had a Guerrero, a Konerko and a Berkman -- the Jays have no hitter like that on their roster, and they need one.
Put it this way -- if Corey Koskie and Shea Hillenbrand return next year and bat anywhere higher than 6th, the Jays won't even sniff the playoffs. End of story.
Pistol: I think that's a little strong. Just look at the lineups of the Astros, White Sox or Angels. Their lineups aren't that impressive and they were three of the last four teams in the playoffs.
It'd be nice to have a strong force in the middle of the lineup, but the most important thing to do is to improve the production the Jays got out of RF this season, and to a lesser extent the backup C. Just getting up to average production from those positions should make a big difference.
Gerry: I do think the Jays are working on this model. I would add to the description by saying the model is good pitching and defense, with no holes in the lineup. Since his arrival JP has focused on pitching, first through the draft, and secondly through free agency. Last year the Jays tried hard to get Clement, this year its Burnett, Washburn or Morris.
Pitching and defence can get you so far, the rest is having a better than average offense. JP has spoken several times about upgrading the offense at whatever position he can. He has also downplayed the probability of a really big bat coming to town. So I would look for the Jays to shore up some of their weaker areas, second catcher, first base and corner outfielder.
Think also of JP's time in Oakland, excellent pitching and OK hitting, other than Giambi.
Mike Green: You can win with a good offence and good pitching/defence, or with outstanding pitching/defence and average offence. The trends of the time matter only insofar as the price of purchasing talent varies. It is usually better to be a contrarian, and purchase the talent that is less appreciated and therefore somewhat less expensive.
Last off-season, average starters and average relievers were outrageously expensive in the free agent market. The names Tom Martin and Eric Milton come to mind immediately. What will it be this year? My guess is that the performance of the White Sox and Astros this year may make it more likely that hitting will be reasonably available on the trade market and that pitching/defence will not. In other words, more of the same.
Oakland for most of the Beane/DePodesta/Ricciardi years in fact featured a very strong offence, and average pitching/defence. The team scored 800-900 runs per season in a tough park. Jason Giambi was not the only bomber; Tejada, Stairs, Grieve and many others hit very, very well. It was only at the end of Ricciardi's stay in Oakland that Beane focused on improving the team defence, at the expense of offence; the reason was clear...it was easier to afford defensive improvements than offensive ones. I suspect that the reverse is true now.
My guess is that the performance of the White Sox and Astros this year may make it more likely that hitting will be reasonably available on the trade market and that pitching/defence will not.
Dave Till: I worry sometimes that J.P. is going to get spooked by the high cost of free agents, as he watches competing (and somewhat silly) owners bid players into the stratosphere. The impulse to not waste money - and thus go home with nothing - may be a strong one.
The Jays have an obvious problem: they need about two big bats. The rest of the roster is in great shape. In particular, they have championship-quality defense, which was a joy to watch, and a deep bullpen.
Gerry: Going back to Lee Sinin's RCAA, the Jays best hitter, Frank Catalanotto, had the lowest RCAA of an leading hitter in the AL. The Jays had no big boppers thanks to sub-par years from Wells and Koskie. After Rios, the Jays next worst hitters were Huckaby, Johnson, Hudson, Adams, Zaun and Koskie. We should look to see how we could upgrade all of these negative RCAA's.
Catcher is a big issue for the Jays. Zaun's numbers were off this year and he might not be able to handle catching 130 games any more. But Quiroz has not shown that he is a reliable platoon partner yet, and he is out of options. The Jays could decide to leave this as a hole to be managed around, or they could look to sign a better option than Quiroz. I believe Koskie will be better in 2006, as I said above, and I also think that Adams/Hill will better with another year under their belts. Hudson is below average offensively, but makes up for it with his glove. Reed Johnson should have fewer at-bats with better options for left field.
I would sign or trade for a leftfielder and a first baseman, giving you this lineup:
C: Zaun and a FA - better in '06 with the FA 1B: FA - beter than Hinske 2B: Hudson - same SS: Hill - better than Adams 3B: Koskie (Hillenbrand) - better in '06 LF: FA - better CF: Wells - got to be better, right? RF: Rios - better in '06 DH: Hilly and Cat - same ??: Hinske, Adams, Quiroz
That makes for better offense from seven spots, a combination of new players, more experience with the rookies, and improvements from some veterans.
Jordan: All the talk of a Burnett or a Washburn underscores the belief that Toronto needs a solid second-in-command starter to Halladay. It's worth debating whether that's actually true -- can a team prosper with an ace and four mid-rotation guys? Give that club a very solid bullpen and a lights-out closer, and I think it can -- if the $10M you'd have spent on a Burnett goes toward acquiring and paying for a major bat instead. It might be a different story come the playoffs -- two or three aces are usually necessary there -- but the Jays need to get there first.
The wild card is McGowan -- he could come into his own next year and give you Burnett-like production at one-thirtieth the cost, or he he could see his straight fastball knocked out of the park and suffer a Halladay v. 1.0 meltdown. The Jays should hope for the former but should expect the latter, which is why my money would go to pumping up the offence and reinforcing the already-solid defence. The pitching needs a little tinkering, not major surgery.
Gitz: I don't like the idea of the Jays going after Burnett. There is the injury risk, first and foremost, and while if he stays healthy he could dominate, there is always the chance he takes the unfortunate Javier Vazquez path: getting drubbed by changing leagues. Burnett is not like, say, Jaret Wright, who was an obvious product of Leo Mazzone and some good luck, but there are similarities health-wise, and for $30 or $40 dollars, the Jays ought to get a proven commodity in return. The second reason I am opposed to getting Burnett or another high-caliber free agent is because the Jays don't seem to need pitching as much as they need hitting.
As ever, hitters are more reliable and more durable, and in somewhat greater supply than pitchers, making them, for the most part, cheaper, except for the obvious high-ticket items like Vladimir Guerrero. (Again, at least you know what you're getting.) Craig B.'s comment that good, cheap hitters are harder than ever to find is true. On the other hand, the Jays don't need to forage for the next Geronimo Berroa. They have the cash to pursue someone like, say, Jim Thome, provided the Phillies would take on a huge chunk of salary. Since it's doubtful the Phillies are dumb enough to trade Ryan Howard (but you never know), Thome makes some sense, despite the injury risk, which is not that dissimilar to Burnett. And at any rate, I am not even necessarily talking about Thome but rather the idea of Thome.
What killed the A's this year was that their pitching was very solid all season but their offense only showed up for a two-month stretch from about mid-June to mid-August. The rest of the time it was agony watching the club lose 3-0, 2-1, and 4-2. This could very well be the same script for Toronto in 2006 if they don't improve the offense.
Dave Till: The Jays don't need Burnett, or any pitching for that matter, if Doc returns and is 100%. The Jays had the best pitching in the division in 2005... by 84 runs... in a hitter's park. Given the high cost of free-agent pitching, and the possible arrival of McGowan and/or Marcum, I think the Jays are in reasonable shape there. Unless they decide to trade a pitcher as part of a package for a big bat, and need to sign someone to fill the hole.
Pistol: I don't think the Jays need to focus on pitching this offseason. As discussed earlier starters are always risky for various reason and the Jays have several in house options in both the rotation and the pen.
However, if a closer is available at a reasonable price I'd pursue it as Batista isn't the answer (and perhaps just the 3rd or 4th best option on the team to be closer). Ryan and Wagner (not to be confused with Ryan Wagner) are probably going to cost more than they're worth, but it's possible that Tom Gordon would come to Toronto to close. He's been excellent the last three years, with a heavy workload (244 innings). Of course, I'm not sure if the workload means he's durable or set to crash from overuse.
The team has positioned itself well over the last few years and is now in the position to make a move in the standings. They’re probably an 85 win team as is for 2006 and it will probably take 95 wins to make the playoffs. A great offseason could get the team there.
