Unfortunate, but understandable for an injury-prone 39-year-old. Considering Sanders is asking for a three-year deal, that probably scotches that possibility, though maybe there's a two-year compromise available down the road.

Bengie Molina is overrated right now and would cost too much for what he would deliver, and anyway, the Jays still need to lower their overall payroll. I think all will be quiet now till spring training approaches.

Really? Over the last three years, Molina has hit .285 / .318 / .433 (1156 AB). With Ramon Hernandez having signed for 4 years, $27.5M, I expect Molina to get 3 years and $5M per as an absolute minimum. As a negligible upgrade on Zaun (under contract for $1M, .254 / .351 / .376 over last 3 years, 938 AB), Molina would be a total waste of cash. What this team needs is a respectable backup catcher who can give Zaun enough days off to keep him fresh.

This is my favourite of the above options by far. Just for the fun of it, I decided to combine Hinske's 2005 vs. RHP and LeCroy's 2005 vs. LHP. The result is 513 AB, 148 H, 29 2B, 2 3B, 24 HR, 62 BB, 8 HBP. That is good for a line of .288/.374/.493... that's an OPS of .867, which fits in nicely on the 2005 leaderboard just above Miguel Tejada (.865) and Mike Sweeney (.864).

What would Vlad or Arod get in this market?

I think the top end is starting to rise again...

The success of the 2006 team is not going hinge on the contributions of the #2 catcher. Include me in the "1 molina is too many" camp. There are better ways to spend that money, if it is available.

All the Jays really need to do is stash a few minor league catching veterans at Syracuse just in case Quiroz hurts himself.

That's a little harsh. The Cat/Reed platoon has been very productive over the past few years. Find Rios a decent platoon partner (convert Hinske to RF!) and factor in a little year over year improvement, and right field should be productive as well.

You don't throw that kind of money at pitching and go into a season with a lineup that might potentially yield only 30-40 HR from 3 key offensive positions (RF,LF,DH).

As opposed to not getting the pitching and still going into the season with the same outfield?

I would agree if the signings had been one year rentals, but we musn't lose sight that 5 year investments were made. It is too idealistic to think that a team that has not even come close to competing for a playoff spot in over a decade should hold onto their resources until the moment came that they could address every need all at once. Incremental gains are better than becoming the Kansas City Royals.

BC Mike, Newton makes a strong point. If now is the time that the Jays have chosen to spend the necessary resources to be a top-notch run prevention team (and I think that they have done this very well), it stands to reason that the acquisition of hitting is required.
Last year, the Jays were a B+ pitching team and a C hitting team, for that relatively unsatisfying B- average. If it takes a B+ average to make the playoffs, and they have upgraded the pitching to A without upgrading the hitting, the pitching improvement is lost because the new average is B (not enough to make the playoffs).

I understand that, but you can't pass up an opportunity to improve your team in one area just because you might have difficulty improving in another area.

Obviously another hitter is needed, but just because one is needed it does not mean that the need will be filled. You can't manufacture one out of thin air no matter how much you want one. The reality is, right now there might not be a deal that the Jays can do. Call it an excuse if you want, but that won't change anything.

The Jays need another hitter, but they need to make the right move to get one. They may even have to go into the season with the lineup they have now whether they(or we) want to or not.

That's the type of statement that's easy to make but difficult to quantify.

in the likely event of losing Crash for some time.

I though Greg Myers was Crash. Is that now Zahn's nickname as well? Is every old, white catcher now named Crash? I guess pretty soon all catchers will either be named Crash, Pudge or Molina. Or Yorvit.

I remember it well -- one of the two games I've ever seen live.

I don't think Molina is a fit for Toronto. We just need to find some power hitting outfielders. I'm disappointed that, so far, JP has failed here (he's accomplished all the other things he needed to do, but this is a big hole). Still, there's time for a trade yet, and there might be a chance in late May when some teams are already thinking that they need to make a move, perhaps for pitching.

Newton, I am not sure that I would call either investment myopic, in fact I think it shows considerable foresight on behalf of the Jays. I believe Burnett's salary is the same for the last 4 years and given his relative youth I fail to see why his expected return is limited to the first 2-3 years of the contract. More so when considering the likelihood that "market value" for pitching is only going to continue to escalate in future years. With fixed cost certainty, the marginal cost for each win in upcoming years should be considerably reduced.

Whether or not they are correct will be determined by the players performance; but the Jays obviously did a lot of homework and their estimation, Burnett and Ryan were "their" preferrable pitching solutions. I would hate for considerable resources to be used to acquire what may not be their preferrable hitting solution just because a need exists.

Even if we take "ever made" to mean "this offseason", this statement is only true on the technicality that the only other 5 year contract this offseason was Paul Konerko. If we open it up to all contracts signed this offseason, I like Burnett and Ryan as investments better than the 4-year contracts given to Johnny Damon, Jarrod Washburn, and Billy Wagner, and the 3-year contracts given to Matt Morris and Jacque Jones

our obvious weaknesses at the most readily available offensive production positions (LF,RF,DH).

As the roster currently stands, Mssrs. Catalanotto & Johnson are in line for all of the left-field playing time and Mssrs. Hinske & Hillenbrand the vast majority of the DH playing time. I'd love to hear who you think are better than these.

Heres an idea, Why not sign Slammin' Sammy Sosa to a deal riddled with incentives.

You see that big fork in his back? That's why not.

This why I brought up whether it would have looked dumber on New York to pay $60-mil for 6 years rather than $52-mil and 4 years in another thread. Of course it would look dumber, because all the nay-sayers gripe about money spread out over years where the risk is too great. There would be a lot of whining about giving an aging player 6 years, and the precedent it would set. But how much of an investment risk would another two years and $8-mil have been for Damon? And wouldn't it have trumped Boston's 4-year, $40-mil offer well enough to appease Boras?

Nobody knows how a player will age or perform in five years. Certainly some players surprise you with durability, others fade too fast. Remember when plenty of industry execs thought Clemens was done heading into 1997? Had the Jays signed him to 7 years at $8-mil per, they'd be laughing. Heck, give him $10-mil per without a trade-me clause or promise.

Arod, Manny, Brown, Hampton, Giambi, Beltran all got the years. Neagle and Chan Ho got 5 years. That record has executives scared of long-term deals. Perhaps they got excited by the success of Bonds' big contract and now many are snakebitten. Jeter is on a 10-year that began in 2001. Jeter's a fine player and a fixture of the Yankees, but who would take a risk on his years and that money?

My point is there are plenty of haters out there of putting ballplayers into big multiyear contracts, and they have plenty of evidence to provide. Then there are people who want to convince the doubters that there are misconceptions and anomalies in those bad cases and the long-term deal still works. Well, the Jays are now a part of the experiment of risk. The Yankees avoided another contract greater than 4 years by overpaying. Personally, I think they could have had Damon for 6 years at $9 or 10-mil per if they offered it at the start. But they paid about the same and avoided those ugly years above 4 no executive wants to see on a contract.

The unfortunate reality is that a player may be good four years down the road but may just want out - à la Manny or Clemens. And Burnett's got an opt-out now too. That's what really kills the mood on these contracts. Then it becomes a no-win situation. He sucks, you pay him. He succeeds, he wants more money or he leaves.

The Yankees, as a third-time payer, had to pay a 40 percent tax on the difference between their $200 million player payroll and the $128 million competitive balance tax threshold. The Red Sox, as a second-time payer, had to pay at a 30 percent rate.
...

The threshold rises to $136.5 million next season and both the Yankees and Red Sox must pay at the 40 percent rate if their payrolls surpass that mark.

With the signings of Hideki Matsui, Johnny Damon and a number of relievers, the Yankees payroll is expected to remain in the $200 million range. The Red Sox, meanwhile, may not hit the threshold this year after their offseason restructuring.

Where can you get better entertainment than in the AL East?

It's possible the Blue Jays might consider moving Aaron Hill or even Eric Hinske to the outfield if they can't add another bat through a trade, but that's not the most palatable option.

I wonder if that's idle speculation (like what has been going on here) or something that's being openly discussed by the team...

It's preferable to wasting someone like Koskie or Hill out there. They are pretty good at fielding grounders and throwing laser beams to first base (though interestingly enough, Koskie did spend some time out in RF when he played for the Twins).

And like another poster said, while Hinske is a big dude, he's reasonably fast as well. He's not slow like say, John Olerud or Bengie Molina.

I think it would be a worthy experiment to try him out in RF next year. It doesn't much matter if he's in LF or RF, though I imagine he has a better arm than Cat, so he would probably be better suited to RF.

If he proves he's able to handle the position, he makes the lineup a lot more flexible:

vs. RHP

1B-Overbay
2B-Hudson
3B-Koskie
SS-Adams
LF-Cat
CF-Vern
RF-Hinske
DH-Hilly

vs. LHP

1B-Overbay
2B-Hudson
3B-Koskie/Hill
SS-Adams/Hill
LF-Reed
CF-Vern
RF-Rios
DH-Hilly

Hill would also pick up some AB against RHP backing up Hudson. The playing time in RF would probably be more 50/50 than a straight 1/3 - 2/3 platoon to allow Rios to get some AB against RHP. Hinske could also pick up playing time spelling Hillenbrand and Overbay.

Yes, but Puckett had a long history of being an outfielder and was disproportionately fast for a man with his build.

While it's true that some infielders have made the transition to being passable outfielders, this, to me, would seem like an act of desperation in Hinske's case. I agree with Pistol. Rios, as a complete package, has to be a better option in RF than Hinske.

Isn't there something in a human rights charter that would protect Vernon Wells from being flanked by both Catanalotto and Hinske?

Right on, Smaj. In fact, with the curious decision to tender a contract to Pete Walker, the Jays have forced themselves to make some kind of move. They're currently committed to 25 players for 2006. What's wrong with that? Well, 13 of them are pitchers, and the only shortstop amongst them is Johnny Mac (to get to 25 you have to send both Adams & Hill to AAA).

It requires ditching both Hillenbrand & Hinske, and tightens up the bench in that neither LeCroy nor Stairs is of much use defensively. I'm all for signing LeCroy but I'd platoon him with Hinske rather than bringing in Stairs. This means shipping Hillenbrand out (which I would hope can be done without including cash), and keeping Aaron Hill on the 25-man to caddy for Koskie (though J.P. has stated he doesn't want to put Hill in a super-utility role).

Yep, just yesterday I wrote this right here in this thread: [j]ust for the fun of it, I decided to combine Hinske's 2005 vs. RHP and LeCroy's 2005 vs. LHP. The result is 513 AB, 148 H, 29 2B, 2 3B, 24 HR, 62 BB, 8 HBP. That is good for a line of .288/.374/.493... that's an OPS of .867, which fits in nicely on the 2005 leaderboard just above Miguel Tejada (.865) and Mike Sweeney (.864).

Hinske/LeCroy is likely the more sensible option; I've just got a soft spot for Stairs, a fellow Frederictonian.

... [S]hipping Hillenbrand out (which I would hope can be done without including cash).

I would be happy if we could deal Hillenbrand for, say, Adam Peterson.

I like this idea, depends on who K.C. wants. I also have no problem with the speculation about moving players to other positions, I think it's a sound concept in terms of plan B. I'd still like the team to obtain a legitimate guy for right-field, but I think names like Adams , Chulk,and Frasor need to be bandied about, as Batista, Hinske, Rios don't seem to have much value on the open market, given the lack of interest they've seem to have drawn .

And what's this:

Shawn Green would go from center to right...

Hey wait a second... screw the righty bat, let's bring Greenie back to town!

Barring an injury to glaus ...

Arizona dumped Hillenbrand on us because they wanted to turn to Glaus. If Arizona wanted to take our Koskie and Hinske contracts in exchange for Glaus, then so be it. But I doubt that's going to happen. If the Diamondbacks are looking to sell, I hope the Jays upgrade their OF with Green.

Pulling this off is not as easy as it seems. JP has been trying to trade these guys for the past few months and _nobody_ is biting.

I'm guessing this rumour is pure speculation on the part of Rosenthal. A few days ago, the Jays just came out and basically said they're done trying to make trades until Spring Training.

trade for Green:

• good PR advantage, particularly if you lose Hudson,
• much improved defense, (Green, Vern and Rios? sweeet)
• slightly if not greatly improved offense

• bad PR when that devastating injury occurs,
• defense downgrade likely,
• some more pop for the kids who like sluggers

While I'm no fan of RoboThal's post trade analysis skills, his ability to break a story is outstanding. I believe this rumour has legs.

Once again, people are making the classic mistake of assuming that Arizona is even interested in Adams/Batista/Koskie.

Currently, the Jays have 4 corner infielders on their roster who are going to cost around 17 MM next year. Unless they make a trade that gets rid of one of them, they cannot take on another corner infielder (especially one who makes 11 MM per season in the next three years of his contract).

Good Grief Bauxites: 40+ homers, 350+ OBP, 500+ SLG!

Small quibble, but Glaus hasn't hit 40+ HR since 2001.

There's a serious case of cognitive dissonance going on here.

The presence of Glaus on the Jays roster will do _nothing_ to prevent Rios from getting 450 AB next year. Glaus does not play OF!

Either San Diego is trying to make Boston look stupid, or really, really smart (in relation to their own stupidity). Are they going to trade Davids, Roberts for Wells?

The Padres also agreed to a $500,000 deal with reliever Brian Sikorski, of which $200,000 is guaranteed. He pitched in Japan the last five seasons.

I hope not.

Mike D., I thought we agreed to disagree about Hillenbrand quite some time ago. We interpret the evidence differently. It's not like I have a personal problem with Hillenbrand (though I think I remember that he made an anti-gay remark on the radio in Boston, but hey, it was awhile ago). I will continue to root for him, and I hope he does very well, I just don't think that he will.

Not sure what this means. I think Hill will be an outstanding bat, although initially he may take awhile to find his footing as many youngsters do. Hudson, I believe was exactly league average offensively last year.

Good to see our potential World Classic team starting shortstop has a job next year. He was having a great year until injury knocked him out.

If Hudson and Batista were traded in the deal and Hillenbrand was traded somewhere else (which wouldn't be hard to do), the salary would work. But in that case, Glaus would be replacing Hillenbrand's production, not Rios', so it's not quite the upgrade I am still hoping for. (Giles would have been perfect. O well.)

I'm leery about trading Hudson.....

Glaus was an awesome talent early in his career and was still a very good player last year. I have no idea how is shoulder is doing, and that is a huge part of the equation. If last year was a step back toward his 2000 season, the Jays are targeting an incredible hitter. It's more likely that 2000 was his career year. It's hard to say whether this would be a positive move without more knowledge of his health.

So if the Jays end up having to kick more into a trade to outbid Boston or Baltimore or whomever, this could become more of an overpay than Overbay.