(Repost from last thread). mlb.tv is carrying today's spring training game. If you have access, watch and chat in the live chat (link above).

Nothing wrong with signing a retred to a AAA deal.

What is funny about Benitez is he has a lifetime 140 ERA+ over 772 2/3 IP with 3 out of 14 seasons below 100 for ERA+, both of which are extremely impressive. However, he also has walked 4.67 per 9 IP in his career which is very ugly. His 10.9 K per 9 IP is impressive. His 1.07 HR per 9 IP is so-so. He has been in the playoffs 4 times with teams that won at least one series each of those 4 times. 3.56 ERA in the postseason with 36 K in 30 1/3 IP and 19 BB's.

I think it is pretty clear what you get with Benitez. A guy who strikes out a lot of guys, gives up a few dingers, and walks a LOT of guys. Someone you always make sure you have a backup for, as he is the girl with the little curl - when he is good he is very, very good and when he is bad ...

So, Bauxites, are you pushing the panic button over this?

Only in the sense that it increases the odds the Jays leave Janssen in the pen, because this obviously shows he's less likely to be injured there. In the same sense that BJ Ryan's injury makes me worry he'll never be allowed to pitch more than one inning at a time.

Depth is a nice thing.  If Janssen and Ryan are not ready to begin the season, the Jays run out Litsch in the 5th slot of the rotation and League and Downs setting up Accardo.  That'll be all right.  It might even mean that David Purcey gets a low leverage spot and really steps up.  Youneverknow.

Chacin looked like garbage in 2 innings against the Yankees today (game is on Sportsnet now), though that's not much of a surprise. 

Anyone know why Purcey's only had 1 IP in real fake games so far this spring?  I just don't like the idea of Litsch winning a starting job by default should Janssen be injured.  Purcey's now on ADD medication, which *might* help him focus enough to make some real forward progress this year.

Well in this day and the age of the internet. We have bored people that read too much into these sorts of signings. Minor league depth signing that can definetely contribute at the big league level and helps the AAA club.

Heck with the Jays defense behind Benitez maybe they help his numbers? (Nothing wrong with the K's)

Purcey is pitching today.

Benitez is a no-risk signing.  I think his best days are behind him and I don't expect him to contribute much (if anything).  If it turns out he still has something left in the tank, that's great.

So what's the feeling on Casey's injury? Is it anything serious? Just precautionary? Day to day?

Heck with the Jays defense behind Benitez maybe they help his numbers? (Nothing wrong with the K's)

There is no defence for the base on balls, which seems to be his chief weakness...

So what's the feeling on Casey's injury?

I expect he'll be all right, but he was wise to shut it down, right away. This may be part of the discovery process whereby he discovers he's more likely to be a killer set-up man, like, say, a Scot Shields, than a fifth starter, but then again, maybe not.

Hmm...another Jays player injured after an intense off-season training regime.

Janssen also pitched a ton last year. Although he only pitched 72.2 innings, he played in 70 games--almost half a season. Granted, some relievers pitch a comparable amount (Scot Shields, for example), but not every reliever has a rubber arm. And Janssen is still very young. You could argue that he was overused, especially in light of the fact that the Jays were out of contention early on in the season.

Signing Armando Benitez doesn't sound as goofy when on the same day the Yankees sign Billy Crystal.

It is being reported in the New York Post (via Rotoworld) that the Mets have contacted the Jays about Reed Johnson and/or Shannon Stewart.  The reporter suggests that the Mets are more interested in Johnson because he can play RF.  If there's truth to this rumour I'd expect to see Johnson traded, even if it's just a salary dump.  I gather from Blair's blogs that the Jays' management is leaning toward keeping Stewart, despite the fact that Johnson has performed better against LHP than Stewart over their careers.

Also, didn't mention this earlier, I think Benitez is a really smart signing. He seems to be a guy who has (or at least had) serious strikeout stuff, and tends to run deep counts. Having him around would certainly make the pen more diverse. There are no real righty-killing strikeout artists on the team as it stands. Benitez would be great as a middle-innings fireman type to get the team out of jams with a bunch of hackers due up. My concern is that the Jays would be tempted to staple League and Frasor to the bench at the start of the year to accommodate Benitez as a full-time setup ace, which would be a mistake. Such a strategy would be consistent with their well-documented Veteran Fetish™.

It would be cool to give the shot to Lee Gronkiewicz if he were still around. Or Jamie Vermilyea. I guess they're not Arnsberg's type though.

My concern is that the Jays would be tempted to staple League and Frasor to the bench at the start of the year to accommodate Benitez as a full-time setup ace, which would be a mistake. Such a strategy would be consistent with their well-documented Veteran Fetish™.

I wouldn't read too much into Benitez' signing - he is on a minor league contract.  If they signed him to a major league deal with a decent bonus, then I'd think they had plans to use him as a setup ace.

That said, while I believe I'm in the minority around here, in my mind anything that keeps Frasor on the bench is a good idea.  At least until his mid-season loss of one of his pitches, at which point he'll make his usual trip to Syracuse.

But clearly Benitez wouldn't need a nice bonus if this is the best deal he can get, right? It's not that they plan to make him The Man. It's that he's around, and he has a decent shot at making the team, and if he does, then he'll quickly become The Man because of the institutional preference for veterans over the guys we already have. My expectation would absolutely be for JP and Gibbons instinctively to prefer him in high-leverage situations over '07 bust League and whipping boy Frasor. Just like Ohka, Chacin and Zambrano over Marcum and Janssen last spring. Real contenders don't use guys nobody's ever heard of. Right?

It seems like the pattern of thinking tends to go, sure, the guys we have are okay, but this guy used to be amazing. Let's give him first shot. It's not like we have anything to lose. Then it turns out we did, oops, and maybe we'll have more faith in the kids in the future. Maybe.

What's the pen if Ryan can't go on March 31? Accardo, League, Downs, Frasor, Tallet, Wolfe, I'm forgetting someone. Vermilyea? Purcey? Randy Wells? Machi? I think they'd go Benitez if he's looking good at the end of the month. I think I would too, with Vermilyea as Plan B if/when Benitez or Wolfe falters. But I'd want to be very convinced of Benitez's being in shape, and I would expect JP's standards to be a bit generous.

It's that he's around, and he has a decent shot at making the team, and if he does, then he'll quickly become The Man because of the institutional preference for veterans over the guys we already have. My expectation would absolutely be for JP and Gibbons instinctively to prefer him in high-leverage situations over '07 bust League and whipping boy Frasor. Just like Ohka, Chacin and Zambrano over Marcum and Janssen last spring. Real contenders don't use guys nobody's ever heard of. Right?

I pretty much always disagree with these comments about institutional preferences for veteran players, but especially given the examples you just provided.  I mean Janssen appeared in every other game just about the entire season, including 12 of the first 32 games and he even played a very key role in the bullpen during those early  stages of the season (5 of those first 12 appearances were 1 run games).  Marcum was actually used more out of the pen than Janssen to start the season (13 times in the Jays first 32 games).  This includes two legitimate save opportunities (i.e. not the 2-inning 5 run lead variety).  Especially considering the success that both players had, I'd say the Jays did all right as far as bringing them along a good pace.

Furthermore, the JP regime has given a fair number of players their first starting job over the years - Janssen, Marcum, Listch, Chacin, Frasor, and League are among the current pitchers.  Hill, Rios, and Johnson are the hitters currently on the team that have gotten their debut.  In addition to those guys, people like Bush, Adams, and Hinske are others that have been given their start on the Jays.

What's the pen if Ryan can't go on March 31? Accardo, League, Downs, Frasor, Tallet, Wolfe, I'm forgetting someone.

Are you assuming that Janssen is injured in this scenario because everything I've read from the organization is that if Ryan is injured, Janssen starts the season in the pen - that'd be your 7th guy.  Parrish is another guy that'd be included in that list of others like Vermilyea, Wells, and Machi.  Purcey doesn't go near the pen to start the season.  I think people are forgetting he's a guy that in 2 years hasn't shown the ability to get AA hitters out and has had less success at AAA.

I wouldn't read too much into how Marcum and Janssen were used early last year - the Jays' opening day bullpen was awful on paper. The Jays were banking on Ryan, League, maybe Frasor and then whatever, the '07 D'backs model. Turns out League got hurt, leaving Ryan, Frasor, Downs, Accardo, Marcum, Janssen and Zambrano, and someone had to take his place. So they were forced to plug whoever started well (Janssen) into leverage situations early and often. With respect to Benitez, if '08 Benitez had been in the '07 opening day bullpen, I would be stunned if they didn't give him preference in the race to assume League's role, because of his experience. I admit that that's subjective though.

That's not the real issue in the Janssen/Marcum case though. The Jays had two obviously major-league-caliber starters in Marcum and Janssen under control for the minimum last winter. You're welcome to call hindsight on this but a number of people thought they were legit at the time. Because young pitchers are inherently risky, the Jays wanted to add depth. And rightly so. So they signed a few more uncertain commodities - Ohka, Thomson and Zambrano - to increase the odds they'd have five major league starters. Which was logical. Then they started the season with Ohka and Chacin in the rotation blocking everyone else and Zambrano as their #6 starter based on some thing, which was ridiculous. I will charitably assume that the Jays are not stupid enough to award rotation spots based on spring training stats. So my contention is that this thing is the Veteran Fetish. Marcum and Janssen were not relievers by trade heading into last year, so starting the year with them in the pen implies a clear preference for the vets who ended up in the rotation. For some reason, when the roles weren't predefined, they were at the top of the pecking order. Was it to protect the young guys' arms? In light of the handling of Royce Clayton (vs McDonald and Olmedo) and Jason Phillips (vs Thigpen) I don't buy that at all.

This precedent makes me worry that Armando Benitez might be treated similarly with respect to this year's pen, if he makes the roster. It's a different situation since Gibbons is the one calling the shots instead of JP in the case of relievers, but I don't expect different results. And to be fair the WPA gap between Benitez and Frasor should be pretty small. Way smaller than between Ohka and Marcum last year, anyway.

In addition to those guys, people like Bush, Adams, and Hinske are others that have been given their start on the Jays.

It's interesting, in 2002 he gave full-time jobs to newbies Wells, Hinske and Felipe Lopez (but not ODog!), and I think he's still smarting from how Lopez turned out. I get the impression that his willingness to let prospects develop in the majors has decreased steadily over time (as opposed to starting out of nowhere last winter) but that is unsubstantiated, I'd be interested to see if it's actually true.

uh, let's try that again. I get the impression he's become less willing to let prospects develop at the big-league level over time, and if that's true, I would be interested to see if the decrease in willingness has happened at a constant rate, or if it's accelerated over time.

Even with Janssen's unknown shoulder ailment, the phrase that comes to mind with respect to the Blue Jays bullpen is "embarrassment of riches".  Two proven closers in BJ and Accardo.  Three guys who would be presumptive setup men on any other team in Janssen, Downs and League.  Then there's Jason Frasor, Brian Wolfe, Parrish, Tallet and now Benitez.

Frankly, we need to consider trade options.  The only real question is whether we should do so now, in order to try and swing a strong starter or a position upgrade, or wait until near the trade deadline to get maximum value (certainly relievers were in huge demand last year at the deadline).

I'd say trade one of BJ or Accardo- probably Accardo at this point, as his value is higher.  If JP can get good returns, I wouldn't mind a bullpen of League closing, Downs and Frasor setting up, and Wolfe, Parrish, Tallet and Benitez rounding out the pen.  That assumes Janssen is either injured or is needed to transition to the rotation.  Not as strong a bullpen as our current one, but do we really need a better-than-average hurler for mopping up?

I wouldn't mind a bullpen of League closing, Downs and Frasor setting up, and Wolfe, Parrish, Tallet and Benitez rounding out the pen.

 Frasor seems more likely to be cut than to be chosen to setup. They've only given him one inning so far.

I may have missed this, but would we owe compensation to the A's if the Jays were to keep Stewart for the season?

While it may turn out differently, Ricciardi is only talking about Benitez in middle innings.

I may have missed this, but would we owe compensation to the A's if the Jays were to keep Stewart for the season?

It doesn't look like the Jays have to give anything up for Stewart (draft pick wise), but the A's can pick up a pick if he's on the Jays.

I agree, and I've thought this was probably the case since day 1 of the Stewart signing.

I like Reed Johnson as much as the next guy, and 2006 was awesome, but that to me really strikes as an outlier.  Since it is clear that we have Stairs as the LH portion of the platoon, I actually think that assuming Stewart can still play (and by all indications he can), I fully expect Reed to be gone sooner rather than later. 

Johnson costs more and will likely provide similar stats to Stewart, and I just can't shake the impression that we've seen the best (by far) of Reed.  If we can get a decent prospect or some sort of other considerations, I think it's solid.

I also like the Benitez signing because guys that can strike guys out have value, and Benitez can do that.  We will have injuries, and I like this depth signing alot.

And Janssen is gone for the season with a torn labrum.

http://www.globesports.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080312.wsptjaysear12/GSStory/GlobeSportsBaseball/home

That's some very unfortunate news.  I thought Janssen would be a better starter than Litsch, or at least would make a good reliever again.  I guess the only silver lining is that  the Jays have enough depth to take the hit.  Litsch becomes the 5th starter and League likely gets a bullpen spot.

Is there any chance the Jays ship Lind, Thigpen, and some pitching Beane's way for Blanton?  I'd like to see Janssen's arm replaced since I'm not sold on Litsch and with two of their top 3 starters TJ patients, the Jays should probably have 6 starters in case an injury occurs.

Ricciari's stated that he might explore the trade market for another starter.  Other than Blanton, who is available that is an improvement over Litsch?

Then they started the season with Ohka and Chacin in the rotation blocking everyone else and Zambrano as their #6 starter based on some thing, which was ridiculous

I won't go through your whole post as I think the above statement shows the lack of objectivity that's present elsewhere.

Chacin is only 9 months older than Janssen, has similar pitching rates (when healthy) to Janssen, and has the lefty thing going for him (lefties systematically outperform all current defense-independent pitching stats).  I fail to see how it is objectively ridiculous to choose him in your rotation versus Janssen.

Let's revisit the decision at the end of last spring.  You have Chacin, who you hope is healthy, and Janssen as two options.  Chacin is 9 months older.  Personally, I'd think that Chacin's 2005 numbers (his last healthy season) and Janssen's 2006 (his only major league experience at the time) would be a good comparison at that point.

Looking at Chacin's 2005, his rates were: 7.2 BF / K, 1.7 K / BB, and 43.6 BF / HR. 
Janssen's 2006 numbers were: 9.25 BF / K, 2.1 K / BB, and 33.9 BF / HR.

So you have two guys, one a lefty and 9 months older than the other, and each have shown similar ratios at the majors.  I think it's a huge stretch to use the word ridiculous when talking about choosing Chacin over Janssen for that spot in the rotation.

For reference, Janssen, last year, had the following rates: 7.6 BF / K, 1.95 K / BB, and 74.25 BF / HR.  Still not too different than Chacin's - although the improvement in HR rate is dramatic and I would choose the 2007 Janssen over the 2005 Chacin.

Gosh, I knew Benitez had been good (if inconsistent), but I thought of him in the Jose Mesa class of reliever ... his BBRef most similars (career and through age 34) include names like Montgomery, Beck, Henke, Percival, Wetteland, Myers, Reardon and Smith (Lee). Nice company, that!

Chacin's 2006 isn't insignificant. He actually posted a 4.25 ERA in 7 starts after coming off the DL, but his peripherals were just as awful as they were before his DL stint: K/9 rates before and after his DL time were 4.91 and 4.75; BB/9 4.03 and 3.75; HR/9 2.27 and 1.50. It'd be nice to see GB% splits to determine whether the HR rate fell due to less awful luck, or more groundballs.

This comparison is admittedly less clearcut than Janssen vs Ohka/Zambrano or Marcum vs anyone, since W-L and ERA alone could lead some people to believe Chacin's 2005 proves that he's worthy of a guaranteed spot whenever healthy. Chacin had put up an intangibles-heavy 3.72 ERA (75.3% LOB, 8.0% HR/fly, 23.6% LD) in 2005 and been injured throughout 2006, while Janssen had slightly higher K/BB, much higher GB% and less pro experience (ie more potential) though he only had a 5.07 ERA in the majors. I value peripherals and upside more highly than past ERA and experience, so I'd have preferred Janssen. I guess there was a decent case for liking Chacin better, if you really believed in the '05 ERA and knew he was healthy.

But the fact that one can make a plausible argument that specifically Chacin was more likely to contribute than specifically Janssen 12 months ago basically amounts to a red herring. It doesn't mean there wasn't an institutional reluctance to solve the 3-4-5 problem internally. With few 'proven' options they brought in veterans and gave them the first shot, at the expense of their April record.

less pro experience (ie more potential)

I thought age was the main determinant in potential, not pro experience, although I stand to be corrected.  Either way, we are talking a difference of 200 innings (if by pro you meant major league) and 9 months more for Chacin, which I consider to be essentially equal as I don't think all players follow the aging process exactly the same.

But the fact that one can make a plausible argument that specifically Chacin was more likely to contribute than specifically Janssen 12 months ago basically amounts to a red herring.

I disagree with the red herring comment.  Chacin was the 1 of 2 pitchers in the season opening starting rotation you mentioned as blocking Janssen and Marcum.  That seems to me to be a pretty significant part of your argument.

Also, I think Chacin and Janssen were at similar stages in their career, however  they had performed differently in the majors to that point (I agree Chacin's 2005 was not in-line with his peripherals, but being a left-hander, I still think his performance was better than what Janssen demonstrated to this point).  The Jays felt comfortable with Chacin in the rotation and did not sign anyone to bump him. 

This is a key aspect to my line of reasoning - if I don't think that Janssen was at that different of a stage in his career than Chacin was.  Then trusting Chacin in the rotation, and at the #3 spot no less, shows that Janssen could have achieved a spot in the rotation and there wasn't a bias against unproven players.

If you determine upside according to # of innings pitched in the majors instead of age, then we're coming at this from two entirely different directions and won't be able to resolve this difference.