Russ Adams started at third base for Toronto today and, according to wire reports, is expected to split time with Hector Luna over the Jays' final 18 games.
So ... your thoughts, Bauxites?
I believed a lot in Russ as a hitter early in his career. Then when the fell into the bad fielding habits he couldn't shake loose he also fell into bad hitting habits he could never get out of. As an all fields line drive hitter with patience, he can do damage. As a one dimensional pull hitter without enough power to make it work, he's not much use offensively.
If he can get back to his old ways, there's a place for him on the team. I'm still not sure he can play a position in the majors but if he can hit even modestly as a lefty, he gives the Jays a bit of a boost.
On the Adams question: I haven't seen his recent games at the 3B position, but there must be some early analysis from some observers. How is he doing at that position? No errors so far, I believe, so is it possible that his defence at 3B is adequate for the position?
On the Glaus question: I wonder if the timing of his surgery is entirely a coincidence, since it allows Glaus to duck the whole steroids controversy until next spring. As far as I can tell, Glaus has not uttered a single word of explanation on the steroids issue. He has allowed the Jays management to answer all the questions for him. I always find it irritating when highly-paid ballplayers think they have no responsibility or accountability to the public. Indirectly, the fans are paying his $10-million salary. Why does he think that he can duck any inconvenient questions? (AJ Burnett has a tendency to do the same thing after bad outings or weird injuries.) If a ball player is going to enjoy all the benefits of fame and fortune in a glamous job in the public spotlight, they should also accept the responsibilities that go with it. It smacks of arrogance for them to invoke privacy to duck a difficult question, when their huge salaries are entirely due to the public nature of their job. If they want privacy, they can work at a factory or a gas station.
The role of 'Glaus caddy' in 2008 figures to not be an inconsequential one. One can't help but feel that Russ Adams is the frontrunner for that role pending the organization making any upgrades in the off-season. I don't imagine they will. A Glaus/Adams 120/40 game split is my forecast.
I also see Olmedo as the 2008 backup middle infielder with the combination of a meager off-season marketplace and a rose-coloured evaluation of McDonald conspiring to keep him a starter.
Throw in Thigpen as your backup catcher and Stairs, if they re-sign him, or Lind, if they don't, as your platoon LF and there you go, your 2008 Blue Jays.
DH: Thomas
IF: Overbay, Hill, McDonald, Glaus, Olmedo, Adams
OF: Stairs, Johnson, Wells, Rios
CA: Zaun, Thigpen
I'm not sure I see 90 wins there. One wonders what Ricciardi will be up to during the off-season if personnel decisions are as etched in stone as I imagine.
As people will remember from the past off-season, I've been a very vocal advocate of having a strong backup 3B, a strong caddy for Glaus, even for this season. The team got very lucky that Glaus's injury plagued season only ended with the team already all but mathmatically eliminated, but the drop off from a reasonably healthy Glaus to Adams or Macdonald or whomever they have in the wings would surely have ended any lingering contention for a playoff spot in all but the best of circumstances.
With the dollars invested in Ryan, Wells, Halladay, Burnett, Overbay, and Glaus himself, the Blue Jays will once again "load" up for a run in 2008. With some luck, that might not be ludicrous. Glaus stays.
I'm sorry, but I should have consolidated this thought into my other post. I simply forgot.
My impression of Adams has always been that he's a Rich Becker type (not too disimilar to Aaron Hill): all patience, no slugging. As soon as pitchers pound the plate, he's less than Eckstein, who can at least spray the ball and hope for an apparently good season with a good BABIP. We've all been waiting for a good Blue Jays SS/SS prospect not named Tony, but our vigil simply continues. Adams is not on a contending team's 40-man roster.
I think Adams can definitely serve a useful role on the team next season - the "Howie Clark" role, if you will. Fill in at a few positions as needed, and be a left-handed bat off the bench.
I have the feeling that the negativity towards him by some people stems from the attitude of "he's a first round pick and should therefore be a star; he's not going to be a star so get rid of him."
Most first round picks don't become stars. Baseball America had Adams ranked as the #19 prospect in the 2002 draft, so it's not like he was some huge overdraft. A disappointment to date, yes.
With the 2 recent loses to the Yanks, I've sort of entered 'meh' mode when it comes to the Blue Jay's. However, I 'these things I believe':
1) Shut down Vernon Wells - With the Jay's (realistically, if not statistically) out of the race, there is no reason for him to play. Get the surgery. Get better. Come to the 2008 camp rested and at 100%
2) Shut down the 'overworked' pen/pitchers - limit Jansen and Accardo's appearances for the rest of the year. Have Wolfe and Towers make a few starts to let McG and Marcum have a few extra days off (especially if the talk of 'Wolfe as 5th starter' is true).
3) Play the kids - Lind should play *every* day. Olmedo should have the bulk of the work down the stretch. Banks should start a few.
Bottomline: It's time to play for next year.
Terry Ryan is stepping down as GM of the Twins.
I wonder if he likes Toronto?
He needs to be placed in a role where he can succeed defensively.
He needs to land in LaRussa's lap. There's a manager who would turn him into a 6-position player.
Outstanding stuff! It's very encouraging that a lot of that is a result of our major league best defense too - I believe defense is very likely to carry over from one year to another. It seems that regardless of who we throw out there, our run prevention will be quite strong. I really hadn't placed Ricciardi as a defense-first guy (Johnny Mac starting aside), and yet he's done a really nice job with defense.
Before i say anythig, let me just say that I'm mystified that there are any ABs fr Hector Luna. If Adams doesn't play every day then somone has their prioritires out of whack
I have maintained for a long time that Adams can have a productive major league career as the second coming of Ryan Freel...I'm glad the Jays are giving him at least a sample of that. But it seems to me that thre's as least as much value in rebuilding Adams' trade value as their is in anticipating what role he would have in Toronto next season. I'm high on Adams as a Freel type - I'm uncertain about him as the firt line of defense against a substantial injury to Glaus.
The White sox, Twins, Astros, at least, might be interested in acheap option as a starter and I'm sure other teams would like a versitle lefty off the bench. I'm not saying "run the bum out of town" here - just that in the course of making a deal, an Adams with SOME value is better than nothing. In light of that, we should give him every opportunity to increase his value this month...not split time with a known fringe player.
So Adams:
Hasn't got the arm for SS but does for 3rd? Right. Hasn't got the bat for SS or 2nd but does for 3rd? Right.
Stick. Dead horse. Beating. Right!
Has anyone looked at before how teams do when they give a season up as lost? How much do teams benefit in the long run by trading veterans and getting higher draft choices?
I don't believe the Jays are anointing Adams their 2008 starting third baseman. They're just trying to find a spot for him and see if he can look like a contributor.
In Glaus' absence, I don't see who else should definitely play third. You could make a case for Luna, or maybe Olmedo, who I think should be playing short for the rest of the season; then again, if you're conceding the position to Johnny Mac for the next two years, Olmedo doesn't have much of a role. After that... Ryan Roberts?
Burnett Pitch Counts:
Get use to high pitch counts for AJ Burnett. Here's why:
a) In 2008 Burnett needs to prove he can stay healthy for a full season so he can opt out of his current contract and hit the free agent market at a time when the market is beginning to explode again, he'll play through the aches and pains next year, mark my word.
b) The Blue Jays will attempt to take advantage of condition a) by running Burnett into the ground much like the Oakland A's have done in past years with their pending departures (see Hudson/Mulder) . The distinction here of course is if AJ goes down next year and decides not to opt out we're stuck with him (really a terrible clause for the Jays).
Bottom line: expect AJ to pitch a tonne of Innings next year, rack up high pitch counts, and hopefully have a great season for the Jays before opting out and getting hurt sometime early in 2009 with his new club.
As far as this season is concerned I'd be trying to save his arm a little for next, as it is absolutely vital he pitches a full season for the sake of 2008 competitiveness and to ensure we won't be stuck with the tab for the following 2 years of almost certain IRdom.
I'd let Arnsberg go because I think that the in game decisions regarding the pitching staff are largely influenced by him. (I have no stats to back this up.) I have not been a fan of the way the staff has been handled this year on the field. It seems that most of the praise from the pitchers has been for Sal Fasano or for Doc and AJ. I haven't heard anybody praise Arne this year. It is no more than my suspiscion that Arnsberg is outdated in his views on pitch limits, conditioning, etc.
Is there any evidence that Arnsberg is helping the staff besides the circumstantial evidence that he is the pitching coach of very good pitchers?
Is there any evidence that Arnsberg is helping the staff besides the circumstantial evidence that he is the pitching coach of very good pitchers?
What evidence could there be? How can one measure the quality of a hitting or pitching coach?
My instinct, prior to his ridiculous remarks, would be to give Arnsberg some credit for the seasons of the young pitchers: McGowan, Marcum, Accardo, and Janssen, all of whom could have conceivably contributed precious little to the 2007 roster and all of whom played pivotal roles. Maybe they just improved on their own, despite Arnsberg, and maybe Arnsberg played a role. It's hard to argue that he didn't play a role (and I'm not suggesting that anyone is doing this) with the bottom lines such as they are.
As for Brantley, he was celebrated in 2006 for the Rios transmogrification and the Wells renaissance. Were these things that might have happened on their own, or did Brantley play a role? I certainly don't pretend to know. Did Brantley spend 2007 preaching messages that the overly free-swinging Wells, Hill and McDonald refused to hear? Did he have advice that Frank Thomas poo-poohed because of his veteran status? Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. And maybe, even if he did, the fact that his good counsel was not heeded is reason enough to get rid of him.
I guess I'm saying that I'm not sure how a coach's input can be measured. Oftentimes, change seems to be made for the sake of change, as a sign that "we're doing something", even if it accomplishes little more than replacing one old crony of the manager with another.
Because the 2007 pitching was strong, Arnsberg is likely safe. Conversely, Brantley likely isn't. I can't help but think that Mulliiniks might be the right man for the job, though he may be better suited for younger, more impressionable hitters. Actually, scratch that. I'd sooner Tabler got the job, then at least I wouldn't have to listen to him any more.
Some coaches probably work better with some players. Maybe Brantley's coaching is beneficial to Rios, but not to Hill. Maybe he can solve some problems, but not others. There are certainly more offensive disappointments than breakthroughs, so I can't see Brantley keeping his job. I hope not, anyway.
On the other hand, almost the entire pitching staff improved this year. Arnsberg's got to get some credit for that; how much is debateable, but I can't imagine firing him would be a good sign. His machismo is somewhat worrying, but that could be largely buffered by a stronger manager. For that matter, no one is injured yet; maybe Marcum and McGowan both blow their shoulders out in the last start of the year, but only Burnett has spent time on the DL this year, and he had pre-existing issues. (which, granted, one would think should precipitate greater caution)
While we're at it, let's make Rod Black the bench coach. It's not like Ernie Whitt has any discernible duties other than bringing the wrong lineup card out there once in a while.
It's very difficult for us as outsiders to get a handle on the impact of any particular coach. As far as the poor performance of the hitters this year goes, I know there have been injuries and I know guys can have off years. What I have found dismaying in observing the hitters is that I'm not seeing good approaches at the plate. It's like everything the opposing pitcher throws comes as a surprise to them. Does this team have any advance scouts? Do they keep video of all opposing pitchers, so that even if you haven't faced Edwar Ramirez before (say), you know that he has two pitches - a fastball and a changeup. Of course you still have to hit it, but I'm seing too much indecision.
Speaking of platooning...at DH: Stairs (L) Thomas (R), at LF: Lind (L) Sparky (R), at C: Zaun (L) Thigpen (R).
It's clear if we're to have any chance in 08 the hitting is going to have to be much better. Hopefully, the lack of injuries will solve part of the problem and maximizing the left right splits will help solve the rest. Similar to what we tried when we had Hinske, Koskie, Hilly etal.
Look who's starting on Saturday.
Why do I have a terrible feeling that the Jays are going to be on the wrong end of a 1-0 game? It's irrational and fairly improbable... but that's just the kind of season it's been.
Try telling the future HoFer making $9M that you want to reduce his workload to 150 plate appearances.
Particularly when he has a third year that vests depending on plate appearances.
Try telling the future HoFer making $9M that you want to reduce his workload to 150 plate appearances.
Particularly when he has a third year that vests depending on plate appearances.
Chuck, I'd tell the HOFer: Do you want to make the World Series?
IF yes...meet Mr. Stairs he's your new platoon partner.
If the answer is No, cut the jerk!
What evidence could there be? How can one measure the quality of a hitting or pitching coach?
The question was tongue-in-cheek. I was asked that question one too many times this week. Having said that, I've heard the young pitchers crediting AJ and Doc plenty of times this year for their improvement. I've heard Doc and Marcum credit Fasano for improvements to their pitches. I haven't once heard someone credit Arne for anything. You think he'd be the first name off their lips.
This past week, after his start, Marcum complains of being tired and says he'll talk to Arne about maybe not throwing in between starts. The next day, Arne says Marcum shouldn't be tired and if he is, the conditioning program's to blame (is the pitching coach not culpable here). When asked for comment, Marcum says he will talk to Doc and AJ about conditioning. Consistently, the young pitchers are going to Doc and AJ as opposed to Arne.
Our starters have consistently been sent out to pitch another inning on high pitch counts when the situation doesn't always call for it. Everyone seems to blame Gibbons, but I doubt he doesn't heed the opinion of Arnesberg on how far his pitcher can go each game.
A few interesting bits of news today:
---Jays have claimed infielder Joe Inglett off waivers from the Indians. He looks like another candidate for the super-utility player that the Jays have been craving since the Jason Smith debacle. He's a 29-year-old who has played mostly in the minors, mostly at 2B, but has also played SS and 3B and the outfield. He has only a half-season in the majors, last year for Cleveland. He does seem to have some ability to get on base. His career minor-league line is .301/.375/.408 with an OPS of .793.
---on the Glaus front, it now emerges that MLB has asked to meet him within the next week (according to the New York Daily News). If he admits to having possessed steroids (not even using them, just possessing them), he could face a 50-game suspension, since the drug policy was in effect at the time. I wonder if some Bauxites will continue to argue that his behaviour in 2004 is irrelevant? To lose Glaus for 50 games next year would be a severe blow to any hopes the team has for contending in 2008. Are we going to continue to shut our eyes and say it doesn't matter?
---Ricciardi says Gibbons will return next year. JP is already offering a preview of the spin and bombast that he will use to defend his 2007 performance. His argument is that Gibbons has been "keeping us at .500" and "we played meaningful games in the early part of September." Does anyone buy this argument? Sounds like a defence of mediocrity. And the Jays, of course, were not playing meaningful games in September, unless you really think that they had any serious chance of overtaking the Yankees, Tigers and Mariners within the space of a couple of weeks.
^^^
Good points - and I agree that there is probably more to Adams than we have had a chance to see.
Regarding the conversation about the contirbution of coaches...i recall haveing seen more than a few posters around the net who wanted Butterfield gone because they don't like the way he coaches 3b...but it seems to me that he's had a noteable positive influance on the infield defense - Adams' issues notwithstanding - and shouldn't be overlooked in that regard.
In Bastian's blog today he reports that Stairs is definetly not a lock to sign next season.
NOTES: Matt Stairs offered his explanation for waiting until after the season to discuss a new deal with the Jays. He wants to see what kind of playing time he'd be in stor for with Johnson still in the fold: "I feel when I'm in the lineup we have a good chance of winning each ballgame. It's something where, are they going to plan on platooning us? There's obviously a lot of questions that need to be answered. Is it going to come back to where I'm going to a 100 at-bat guy?" Stairs said his first choice is Toronto, but he's obviously shown what he can still do with a solid number of at-bats. If he's going to simply be a bench guy again with everyone healthy, Stairs may opt to explore his options elsewhere. ...
His argument is that Gibbons has been "keeping us at .500"
Exactly the problem, I'd say.
If Glaus were known to be missing 50 games, the obvious solution is to go sign or trade for a second teir 3B who could work as either a midseason deal or a bench player when he comes back. some possibilities include: Mike Lamb, Aaron Boone, Eric Hinske, Cory Koskie (if healthy), Jeff Crillo, Pedro Feliz, Morgan ensberg, Kevin Kouzmoff, Joe Crede, Russ Branyan, Macir Izturus, Dallas McPherson, or, if you are more ambitious, Garciaparra or Figgins.
If Figgin is capeable of playing SS (or if Nomar could get it back and hold up physically) it would be possibly a blessing in the long run to get them but I assume that's a bit of fantasizing in both cases.
And Stairs has a choice to make: does he want to be a role player on a good team, or more of a regular on a poorer team?
Dave, not sure if you were implicitly suggesting that Toronto was the good team in question. I imagine Stairs might have a difficult time signing up in 2008 with Toronto for what he signed up for in 2007 (a presumed 100 AB bench role), now that he's got 300 AB of 380/580 leverage working for him.
Power to him if he'd prefer to be Sweeney's replacement in KC or the DH the Twins never had over a 100 AB offer from a contender, or even a pretender.
Two quick points on the Glaus and Stairs issues:
1) although I seem to have sparked a lot of debate by quoting the New York report on a possible 50-game suspension for Glaus, it has to be remembered that this is still just a possibility -- and maybe an unlikely possibility. I would imagine that MLB would need some pretty powerful evidence -- or a confession from Glaus himself -- before it takes the near-unprecedented action of suspending a player for something that happened 3 or 4 years ago. Glaus might be able to produce some kind of explanation that satisfies the MLB officials. For example, the Globe's baseball blog has mentioned that Glaus might argue that the steroids were intended for his wife's horses. (She is a world-class equestrian athlete, isn't she? So she has horses which might need medicine....) Is this a far-fetched explanation? It does sound a little odd, but maybe it is plausible. Certainly a ball player (like anyone else) has to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. I still think, however, that he owes the fans some kind of public comment.
2) From everything he has been saying all year, I think Matt Stairs would love to come back to the Jays again next year. I think he credits the Jays with rejuvenating his career. And he is a Canadian patriot who has made it clear that he loves the idea of playing for a Canadian team. Of course he'll want to hear the offers from other teams, so that he can assess his market value and then try to negotiate a fair contract with the Jays. And of course he doesn't want to be limited to 100 ABs next year. But I don't think anyone imagines that he would be limited to 100 ABs with the Jays in 2008. Surely he would get at least 200 ABs and maybe 300 or more. He is a valuable back-up at three positions: LF, 1B and DH. There's a definite chance of injuries to at least one of Thomas, Overbay and Johnson next year. And even if there are no injuries at all, I could see him getting one start a week at LF, one start at 1B and one start at DH. So I think he could be pretty confident of a pretty busy year in Toronto next year if he stays.
With ability to play LF or 1B, plus the fact that he clearly loves playing in Canada, I would expect him to either split time with Johnson or Lind in LF next year.
I see Stairs getting squeezed on all fronts for playing time next season.
Prior to 2007, Overbay was good for an average of 158 games from 2004 to 2006. A healthy Overbay won't leave many crumbs for Stairs in 2008.
In LF, there are two concerns. If Lind starts off strong in AAA, he'll need to be worked into the lineup. As a fellow LHB, Stairs would be redundant. And I'm not convinced that Johnson's role will be rightfully diminished to that of platooner (he is now, I know, but that's post-back surgery; things will change come spring training). So Johnson would be chewing up some amount of ABs against RHP, at Stairs' expense.
At DH, Thomas is motivated to see his option year vest. He needs 1050 PAs in 2007-08 for this to happen, so I'd once again expect him to stay in the lineup as much as he can, even at less than 100%. Further, management may have a deal with Thomas that if he wants to play, he gets to play, and that the vesting year will only not come to pass if Thomas misses time on the DL rather than being intentionally rested.
I'd expect a 350/450 season out of Stairs in 2008 and if he can parlay his 2007 into a starting DH job, say in Minnesota or KC, he should do it. It'll take injuries again in 2008 for him to work his way into the Jays' lineup, at least as I see it.
The Jays seem to need all the help they can get next year against RHP. The question to me doesn't seem to me to be one of Stairs versus Lind, but rather is there a way to get both bats into the lineup.
Maybe this means a trade of Thomas, though it's going to be hard to trade $9M plus an option year for a DH with less than 25 homeruns and 90 rbi, albeit with good patience.
Wells, Johnson, and Overbay seem to be keys and if they don't rebound in huge ways then it's going to be hard to improve much. You can't sell low on any of them either.
Injury woes...good thing the Jays are out of it...
Also, what a f'in game!! One of the most entertaining all year, no doubt. McGowan CG with 9Ks and 0 BB AND 3 HR from Thomas, all against the Sox... awesome defense too - especially Vernon's catch.
I think I'm not the only one who will laugh at this, posted by a Sox fan on the Sons of Sam Horn message board:
What a crappy game. Not only did the Sox play a bad game, but it was a boring bad game.
I won't argue too much about the pitch count issue, Mike, but the occasional 120 pitch outing with the pitches more or less evenly spaced shouldn't be a concern. I think there was only one inning (the fourth) where he had a high count.
Certainly I believe a seemingly innocuous 100 pitch outing where the pitches by inning go something like 12-23-11-20-12-22 is more stressful than what McGowan did.
Still, I would have taken him out after 8. it's late in the season.
I think there are two things you look at when a pitcher throws 120+ pitches.
a) Was he tired and being unduly stretched?
b) Was it necessary?
I think today in answer to (a), he didn't seem tired. Velocity was still up, movement was still there, though he gave up two singles, the leadoff duck snort being erased by trying to stretch for no particular reason. He recorded a strikeout. That's not to say that he wasn't tired or that the additional work wasn't a risk for his arm.
I think the answer to (b) was quite obviously "no". There's really no reason at all that a guy who's thrown 105 pitches through 8 innings and leads by 5 needs to go out for the 9th when he's not pitching for a shutout or no hitter in the midst of a meaningless season. And even with a shutout on the line, there's plenty of managers who would have no problem with playing it conservative with a TJ arm with a relatively safe lead.
I think the only reason he was out there is that the coaching staff is allowing these starters more of a free reign in how many pitches they throw. I'm not sure why pitch counts are suddenly going out the window but in the case of the big three righthanders, they have. And Marcum was admonished for being tired. So clearly there is an expectation being set that starters have to go deep, pitch counts be damned. Seems like the same approach used by the Marlins during Arnsberg's stint there when a bunch of their starters went on the DL and the team had a mediocore record overall despite good pitching stats. Sounds quite familiar this year with a lot of needlessly high pitch counts.
It hasn't been a crazy year for McGowan in terms of pitches thrown though he still throws more per inning than the average pitcher (15.7). That's actually quite respectable given McGowan's history. I'm a bit more worried about the starts in August where he lasted just 5 or 6 innings and was around 100 pitches.
All bets seem to be off for Halladay though who since July 28th has exceeding 120 pitches an astonishing FIVE times, including 4 out of 5 starts between August 19th and September 10th. Incidentally, the Jays have a 1-4 record in those five games though Halladay lasted at least 8 innings in each one. The last of the games being the 9th inning meltdown which may or may not have led to a much more sane 100 pitches over 7 innings in his next outing. Again, one wonders why this was occuring when the Jays had less than a ghost of a chance at the playoffs.
Then you look at Burnett who threw 131 pitches over just 7 innings on June 7th and lasted less than 5 innings his next two outings before going down with the sore shoulder (which he was for some reason villified for). In his last 4 starts, Burnett has thrown between 110-120 pitches, going 7 or 8 innings. That's on the edge of pushing it for a guy who's had arm problems but not quite to the level Halladay's been used up lately.
Maybe they're setting a tone for what's expected next year. Throw lots, no complaints about fatigue or soreness. Or maybe they're setting themselves up for a downturn in performance and an upturn in shelf time for these guys.
One minor devil's-advocatish point - eventually (we hope) the team is going to be in a race late in a season and they'll need McGowan to go 120 pitches or so in a meaningful situation. You have to let him do it before that time comes, and last night was the perfect time, a game he had not been overly stressed to that point.
Having said that, I hope that is the reason and not some macho B.S. emanating from the staff. And now I'll shut up on the subject.
