You can't get a more emphatic denial of interest in a player than that. Good thing, too.

This isn't meant to suggest a comparison in raw talent, because I don't think there is one. But watching Shaun Marcum work last night -- the mechanics of the delivery, the rapid pace, the sense of command -- suddenly reminded me of Dave Stieb. I always liked Marcum, all the way through the minors, but even I never thought he could do what he's done so far. I don't think it's an illusion, either.

 

Really, who cares about this?

Girls of fifteen?

JP might be trying to drive Wilson's price down, but this is pretty unequivocal:

"We have absolutely no interest in Jack Wilson," said Ricciardi. "None." (from the G&M link above)

Compare JP's comments in November 2006 (much to the chagrin of many Jays fans): "We like Royce Clayton. We like a lot of guys," Ricciardi said. "We're going to address that in the next few days." (Rotoworld.com)

The Jays are one of two teams to make Santana look like an ordinary pitcher. He's now 2-4 with a 4.84 ERA against the Jays in his career - and 1-3, 5.76 at the Dome. Only the Rangers have hit him harder (5.05 ERA), but he still has a 3-2 record.

Mind you, he's still struck out 52 Jays in 48 innings, so he's not that ordinary.

JP might be trying to drive Wilson's price down, but this is pretty unequivocal:

"We have absolutely no interest in Jack Wilson," said Ricciardi. "None." (from the G&M link above)

And BJ Ryan had successful Tommy John surgery on his back.  When there's an agenda you don't always give the truth.  It may be true, but it may be posturing too and I suspect that's the case her, particularly when the Pittsburgh papers mention it.

There's no reason for the Jays to be in a hurry to acquire Wilson.  There's really no other teams that need him and acquiring him now isn't much of an upgrade to make a difference this year.  If the Pirates brought up Glaus when talking about Wilson they obviously have too high an opinion of him.  With the acquisition of Izturis they seem to want to dump Wilson.  And the longer you let them hold onto Wilson the more the price should go down, particularly with his contract.

Wilson's good enough to consider as an option, but not good enough that you should commit to him today.  Perhaps something better comes along in the offseason or prior to the trading deadline.  Maybe Chin-Lung Hu becomes available if the Dodgers want Glaus.  But maybe come Jan 1, 2008 Wilson's the best option the Jays have and they should look at him then.  Wilson's nothing to get excited about, but he is better than the current options the Jays have.

I'm still arguing for Wilson Betemit to play SS.  I'm not sure what the dodgers are looking for in terms of players, but the guy has been regulated to a backup INF role, but he addresses a major need of the jays: an SS who can hit RHP.  His Splits are pretty slanted in that respect - however, who knows how long they plan on keeping him on the Bench, with the current hot streak he is on - he could probably handle main SS duties, and if you really wanted to, platoon Jmac with him.

This is the guy I'm targeting if I'm JP.

I have no idea why this is such a much discussed topic, at least in the media.  Really, who cares about this?

These are two separate questions.

The second of these is a function of personal taste. There's no reason that anyone should care. We're not exactly talking about Darfur here. But some will care, and it's their prerogative. This is almost certainly unprecedented, in the history of sports, I would think, where a hallowed record is about to be broken amidst a conspiracy of indifference. That's at least a little interesting, at least in the context of professional sports (which is really not much more than a frivolity).

As for the first question, I can't help but feel that you're being a little disengenuous. I imagine that you do know why it's being discussed to death but are simply sick of the story, which is an entirely legitimate position. The most vaunted record in baseball, and perhaps in all of professional sports, is about to be broken.  Baseball ownership and their shills, the commissionner's office and the media, are assuming a high ground posture on the matter of PEDs. Baseball is flourishing, so the marketing potential of the Bonds homerun chase can be safely unexploited. Now, back up a few years, when McGwire and Sosa were chasing Maris' record. The game wasn't in great shape then and that chase needed to be marketed to death. Which it was, and effectively so.

Are we to believe that ownership (and the commissioner's office and the media) now know something they didn't know then about PEDs? Doesn't all of this smack a wee bit of hypocrisy? Where was the moral indignation a decade ago?

Selig is a duplicitous, insincere weasel. It's entirely his job to be on hand when the homerun record is broken. It's entirely his job to promote this achievement as a way of marketing the sport. Nine years ago, he pretended he didn't know what the players were doing, when it was in his self-interest. Now it's in his self-interest to pretend he cares about what he "now" knows. Who is he fooling?

Ecstatic Beer not showing up for Barry Bonds' eclipse of the HR mark?  Yeah, I know he's duplicitous, but at this point, I doubt that there is a huge marketing advantage to be gained, one way or the other.  The response of the Hall of Fame to McGwire's candidacy probably captures the public's sentiments pretty well. People are strange.

I think the problem with a Betemit for SS campaign is that two organizations (ATL and LAD) have now determined that he cannot actually play SS.  The Dodgers have used him almost exclusively as a 3B in the last 2 years.  I haven't seen him play SS since 2004 (I know he has played SS since then but I haven't seen him do it) and he wasn't very good back then.  He has a strong arm but that's about all he has to recommend him for SS.

The one thing I didn't get with this whole Glaus-Wilson thing (aside from it being the most laughable proposal I've seen published in a major newspaper in a long time) is that the Pirates have one of the more promising 3B prospects out there in Neil Walker, the 1st pick in the '04 draft.  Walker is a Pittsburgh native playing in AA Altoona now.  Why would a small market NL club like the Pirates trade for a slow-footed third baseman who has a no-trade clause and is signed through 2009 (including his option year) when the club has a guy that should be ML-ready sometime in 2008?

Do sports writers think about this stuff before they write or do they just need something typed up to meet a deadline?

I think the problem with a Betemit for SS campaign is that two organizations (ATL and LAD) have now determined that he cannot actually play SS.  The Dodgers have used him almost exclusively as a 3B in the last 2 years.  I haven't seen him play SS since 2004 (I know he has played SS since then but I haven't seen him do it) and he wasn't very good back then.  He has a strong arm but that's about all he has to recommend him for SS.

I'm not so sure about that.  Both situations have had entrenched SS's who aren't going to be moved, who play the position very well.  Furcal is one of the best Defensive ShortStops in the majors, and Renteria is extremely good offensively and good defensively.  It isn't that he can't play SS, it is just that both positions are filled by full timers, so he has been seeing a lot of work at 3B (during the Chipper injuries) and there during LA's musical chairs of 3B.  But you are right, I haven't seen him as a 'great' defensive SS - but I don't think he is the butcher that some people are thinking he might be.

Isn't Jack Wilson just a more expensive albeit younger version of Royce Clayton anyway?

Clayton '07 - .254 .305 .346
Clayon career - .258 .313 .367
Wilson '07 .252 .305 .347
Wilson career - .264 .306 .366

I'd be surprised if you could find another shortstop with more similar numbers - both this year and career. And while Clayton is a one-year comittment of a couple million, Wilson is under contract for a few more years at $5-6M per season.

A giant pass on this guy.

Wilson actually is a top notch defender.  While not Everett-esqe, he is still very good.  That is the only reason this is being debated.

Well, I agree with you that the LAD may not have reached the conclusion that Betemit cannot play SS but I can tell you that ATL definitely did.  Betemit came up in the Braves system behind Furcal and, as you say, Furcal is (and was then viewed as) the better SS defensively.  However, at the end of 2005 it was clear to the Braves that they were going to lose Furcal to free agency.  They had Betemit in house and  when they did lose Furcal  they chose to acquire Renteria.  I can remember an interview with Bobby Cox on TBS near the end of the 05 season in which Bobby essentially said that they weren't comfortable with Betemit's defense - he had made a large number of errors in Richmond and they just didn't view him as an option at that position.  ATL then traded him mid season in 06 to LAD where he has been behind Furcal again.

I know his offense isn't great and I'm pretty sure his leg's broken... But I still think Adam Everett is the answer at short.

Anothr beauty by the team tonight. Its amazing as soon as they are offically counted out - coming home from New York - they go on a tear. Anyway, theres some awful good signs coming from this team.

MacGowan only has two stinkers in at least his last eleven or so starts. I think he is really showing a level of consistancy that you would expect from one of your top starters. Towers seems alright and I expect he will be a plus starter the rest of the way. Doc looks to be back as well. I'm not going to complain about Marcum on the basis of his season and he actually looks alright too. AJ will be back anytime. Maybe.

A couple days ago I started a little Towers musing. Here's what I'd like to see.

Unless Riciardi has his "socks blown off", I hold onto him and play it out with him. I just have a feeling he will be a guy we regret giving away for a C plus prospect.

I also feel like he is part of that little rotation unit and fits in well with the guys and he will feel pushed bvy them. Right now he looks like a really solid guy to give the ball too every fifth day or so.

 

And now 8 games out of the wild card, and at .500 with a +18 run differential.

The main thing is that the club is more or less healthy for the first time all season.  The pitching is good, and there are a couple of prime age ballplayers with batting averages significantly below their career norms (Overbay, Wells), and no one really above reasonable expectation.  Thigpen is a positive addition.  Youneverknow, we might have an interesting September after all.

Unless Riciardi has his "socks blown off", I hold onto him and play it out with him. I just have a feeling he will be a guy we regret giving away for a C plus prospect.

If he's not in Toronto next year, and he probably won't be, I'd say he's going to be in the NL. And when he does, yes, people are going complain when his ERA drops by a run.

But the guy is going to be 30 years old. He's been up, and down, and up, and down, and up again in terms of his success. Casey Janssen or Jesse Litsch or Josh Banks or David Purcey deserve to compete for that spot. They are the long term solutions and they have higher ceilings than Towers.

I am a huge Towers fan, and I've supported him, but the time has come for both parties to move on.

I'd rather have Josh Towers in my rotation than Gustavo Chacin.  Does Chacin have any trade value whatsoever?

Anyways, I also wonder if Josh Towers wouldn't be happy to remain in Toronto.  He's had his only truly good seasons with the Jays, and he's the Jays never gave up on him after some truly ugly periods.  As a control pitcher, he relies on a strong defence, which the Jays give him.  For a guy who's struggled with consistency, I'm not sure he'd want to uproot himself, especially if the rest of the season goes well.

If Towers is in a Blue Jays uniform next week, let alone next year, I'll be surprised.

Towers is good enough to make the team look bad if they let him go for nothing, but probably not good enough to return anything of value or dependable enough to re-sign. There's a good chance Ricciardi will look foolish no matter what he does.

That says, Towers is probably as good as he'll ever be, and that's a talent level that sits around "okay". Unless he's willing to sign a deal close to the minimum but laden with incentives, it's probably just as well to let him go.

Here's how I think of Josh Towers now.  He had the best year of his career in 2005 and the worst in 2006.  Both are out of context with the rest of his career.  If you add his totals for those two years, he threw 270 innings with an ERA of 4.79 with a FIP of 4.53. This is essentially consistent with his performance in 2004 and in 2007, although modestly better on both counts. His ERA over the 2004-07 period is 4.88 and his FIP is 4.68.

League average ERA is 4.89 and Toronto is a modestly favourable hitter's park.  Starters, of course, have significantly higher ERAs than relievers on average.  In other words, Josh Towers has been, over the last 3 and 1/2 years, a slightly better than average starter, taking into account the context.  The only twist is that his increased K rate of this year gives reasonable hope that he can continue this for a few years, at least.

This does not mean that he is necessarily the 5th best option for a starting slot on the 2008 Blue Jays.  That remains to be seen.  It is likely though that he is at worst the 6th best option, and given the vagaries of starting pitching, that means that he would, if retained, be likely to get at least 140-150 innings worth of work, and be well worth whatever he would be likely to earn through arbitration.

I don't think people have a really good idea how good a fifth starter (behind Halladay, Marcum, McGowan, Burnett) Towers has been this year, keeping his ERA under 5.00. He's better than Tavarez in Boston, Maroth in Detroit, Lee/Westbrook in Cleveland, Colon or Santana in LA, and these are the playoff teams right now. Toronto isn't getting great pitching from any starter (consistently) right now, but Towers is more than acceptable. And since I maintain the Jays are out of it (.500 record in late July is a tease, and I'm not getting my hopes up too high), and they should probably consider shutting Marcum or McGowan down in September, Towers is still incredibly useful.

Ack.  League average ERA in the AL over 2004-07 is 4.50.  It is still true that Towers has been a slightly above average starter, bearing in mind context and the performance differences between starters and relievers.

He's better than Tavarez in Boston, Maroth in Detroit, Lee/Westbrook in Cleveland, Colon or Santana in LA, and these are the playoff teams right now.

Of course, Maroth is in St. Louis now ... I think Westbrook is one of the great mysteries of the current game. Why is he not 18-7 every year?

D'oh...I knew Maroth on the Tigers didn't look right anymore, but I was just taking a quick glance through teams' stats, and he had the fifth most starts. Anyway, my point stands whether he'd still there or not. He was the fifth starter on a first place team for most of the year, whee offense carried the team to success. Jays are fifth in ERA (last I checked, there's a logjam in the middle of the league), and the starters have been better than expected, except for  the top guys. The only pitching failures this year on Burnett, which we knew could happen, and Halladay (who perhaps is turning it on now).

Westbrook, aside form this year which has been notably terrible, has always walked the same fine line that Halladay does in terms of not striking out very many, plus he walks a few more (K/BB of 1.7 for his career). Some guys , despite appearances, just don't miss bats like they appear they should, although I'd assume there's more to his struggles this year (arm fatigue, mechanical problems, Cleveland defense?).

I think that Towers is a poor fit for the Rogers Centre. He'd do well in a ballpark in which home runs are harder to come by.

It would make sense to swap him for a pitcher who gives up ground balls and is playing for a team with a poor infield defense.

I also would like to see how well the Jays do with (virtually) everybody healthy, and with the starting rotation the way it is now. Contention this year is unlikely, but a good run the rest of the way would make it easier for J.P. to fill holes in the off-season, if he plans on going into the free agent market again.

Contra Jordan (always a dangerous way to start a sentence) I think there's not much chance the Jays move Towers before the deadline. I don't see who'd be interested in him (a different thing from who'd be helped by him) and who'd be willing to give back anything of value for him. This may be wishful thinking: the guy's grown on me this year, and I think that he's actually managed to meet Ricciardi's pre-break challenge, when he said that "unless Josh runs away with it, Chacin's going to be back in the rotation," or words to that effect.

My wishful thinking does have limits, though. I doubt that he'll be resigned come the end of the season, though if he were willing to accept the right terms, I think I'd like to see that. My definition of the right terms would be some sort of incentive-filled contract with a low base salary, perhaps with a reasonable club option for a second year. Whether there'd be more of a market for him out there than that is something I doubt, but of course it's more than likely that management doesn't want to get on this ride again. Which is a shame, because I think Towers could help next year's team, as a swingman/injured starter insurance.

make it easier for J.P. to fill holes in the off-season, if he plans on going into the free agent market again

Realistically, what would the Jays be looking to fill?  Obviously, SS, but there aren't appealing options there as free agents.

I think any changes the Jays make between now and next year are going to come through trades.

And BJ Ryan had successful Tommy John surgery on his back.

What kind of freak are they turning him into? Who's the Jays' surgeon, Dr. Moreau?

Who's the Jays' surgeon, Dr. Moreau?

That would explain the monkey that was grafted onto Vernon Wells' back.

 

Rat, Philly was mentioned on MLB.com trade rumors that they were interested and had scouts at the last two Towers games.

Philly was mentioned on MLB.com trade rumors that they were interested and had scouts at the last two Towers games.

In honour of the Wilson for Glaus rumours that were printed by hopelessly optimistic papers in Pittsburgh, I propose a Towers for Rollins trade. The Phillies are way ahead in runs scored (NL), and dead last in ERA. They could use Towers, even if he'd be in a noted HR park half the time.

Not unless they throw in Utley, too.

I mean, come on. We're not giving Towers away here.

I agree the Jays wouldn't get much for Towers -- certainly not a replacement shortstop or anyone for the 25-man roster this year. But I think Ricciardi could find an Accardo-type player in the rough inside someone's system. (Hey, maybe the Phillies will send Francisco Rosario back.) I think Towers will be dealt now because pitching is in very short supply, he's relatively cheap, his value is high after some good outings, he won't re-sign with the Jays next year (not for a one-year deal with incentives, not on this market), he's really a #6 starter on a good staff, and it seems fairly clear the front office is down on him personally. I doubt the Jays would offer him arbitration after this season, so instead of getting nothing for him then, they'll try to get something for him now. But we shall see.

  To be serious for a moment, the issue of what to do with Josh Towers in 2008 will depend partly on his arbitration value.  Can anyone make any educated guesses on what an arbitrator would award him?   Would it probably be equal to his current salary or greater?   If so, the Jays might have to think twice about it, even though he could be a useful 5th or 6th starter next year.

    You have to have a lot of sympathy for any arbitration judge in the Towers case -- and you have to have sympathy for Ricciardi too as he tries to decide what to do with the guy.  On his best days (and months), Towers can be freaking brilliant.  On his worst days (and years), he can be absolutely horrible.  Which is the real Josh?   What do you base his arbitration value on?   How do you decide his trade value, or his value as a 6th starter for a team with several unproven youngsters in the starting rotation?

For good or for bad, arbitration values are based most heavily upon what players with the same service records are getting, so you're starting with fairly tight parameters. At that point, it's not up to the arbitrator to guage Towers' potential, only to opt for the argument, and corresponding figure, that best portrays his worth. I'm quite certain that that will be based on a retrospective analysis of what Towers has done, not on any forecasting of what he might do.

Arbitration can only cut a player's salary by 15-20%, correct? So you're still looking at over $2 million for Towers next year; if he pitches well for the rest of the year, he's more likely to go up than down.

Of course, even $3-4 million is a good deal for Good Towers. But if Homery McBattingpractice shows up in 2008, that's $3-4 million the Jays didn't have to spend on... well, I don't know what you can actually buy for $3 million these days. Pizzas for all the guys after a win, I guess.

The major factor in arbitrations is service time.  What does a roughly league average starter with 4 years of service get?  Last year 4 years service starting pitchers Oliver Perez signed for 2.3, Horacio Ramirez signed for 2.65 and Mark Hendrickson signed for 2.9.  Josh Fogg (who had 5 years) signed for 3.6 and Nate Robertson (who had 3 years) also signed for 3.6. 

Where exactly Towers would place I have no idea, but if you entered $3 million in the spreadsheet, you probably wouldn't be too far wrong.

On his best days (and months), Towers can be freaking brilliant.  On his worst days (and years), he can be absolutely horrible.  Which is the real Josh?

That exactly is the real Towers. 

And really you can describe almost all pitchers that way.