Batter's Box Interactive Magazine

25 Sept 2008.

So fourth place it is.

I missed most of this one, it seems to have been a bit of a pitching duel, which is fitting I suppose for what is likely A.J's last game in a Jays shirt. I hope the faithful at the RC game him a big hand for his 8 Inning, 2 run, 11 K outing. I got in just in time to see Killer Carlson have a bit of a meltdown in the 10th that was capped by a Bobby Abreu grand slam, but as Wilner said after the game 'Jesse Carlson is entitled' after the terrific season he's had.

WWJP:
* They will talk to AJ over the playoff period about coming back. J.P likes AJ's agent who's easy to work with and 'honest and open'.
* There are 4 lefties on the way - will be interesting who makes the next step first. Mills is probably a year away, but he's taken huge steps this year, Ricky Romero has really started to turn the corner.
* Arencibia was up in Toronto visiting Snyder, so they got a uniform on him and had him take BP with the big leaguers. He seemed to impress Wilner at least.
* Offered Carpenter the same deal as St Louis did, he just wanted to try a new organisation. [I never knew that]
* Aaron Hill expects to be told tomorrow that he can start working out in two weeks.
* Theres no exact science to how many Innings the young arms should throw. They increased Purey's workload by 100 Innings after he was injured last year, and JP thinks they were verging on going too far with him.
* Anaheim are his pick for the WS based on home field advantage.
* Hill is likely to stay at second, too much to ask him to move to short after the problems he's had this year.
* Likes the WBC, but doesn't like timing of it.
* Mentioned Doc, Wells, Scutaro, Rios, Downs, Campbell, Richmond are all likely to be playing for their countries next spring.
* Likes to use his own observation for measuring defense, he clearly is not very interested in the defensive metrics available. 'I just prefer to trust my eyes when it comes to defense'.
* Expects BJ to be a lot better next year after he has some more time back from injury.

Game Day: Doc goes for win number 20 against in the season finale against Carl Pavano. RC 7:07PM.

Posted by Gwyn on Wednesday, September 24 2008 @ 10:46 PM EDT.

25 Sept 2008. | 80 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

92-93 - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 12:07 AM EDT (#192797) #

Jays2010 - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 12:47 AM EDT (#192798) #

ayjackson - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 01:02 AM EDT (#192800) #

The first 15 picks of the first round are guaranteed. They can not be lost as compensation for signing a free agent. So if AJ goes to a top 15 club, say Washington, we will get a 1st round supplemental pick and Washington's second round pick (provided AJs the highest ranking FA Washington signs, else it could be their third round pick I think).

If we then sign an A ranked free agent, we would lose our first rounder (#19 currently).

Interestingly, Washington and Baltimore - AJ's home town teams - are the second and fifth worst teams in Baseball. Another team rumoured to be interested in AJ - the Yankees - might sign one or two free agents ranked higher than AJ (Texiera, Manny). We might be hard pressed to get a first rounder back for AJ. Florida, St. Louis and Houston are the highest ranked teams that could lose their first rounder to compensation, then us, Minnesota, Milwaukee, Yankees and Mets. I missed the Dodgers in their ahead of us too.

92-93 - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 01:13 AM EDT (#192801) #

I think he meant a Top 15 team in the standings, not in the draft. If you did, the answer to your question is yes.

And for the record, I'm not sure if there's that much of a difference between giving Ricciardi the 20-25th pick or the 30-35th pick.

Jays2010 - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 01:32 AM EDT (#192802) #

Thanks 92-93. You're right, it probably does not make much difference to JP where he picks (hence he gets the coveted midrotation lefty with the 5th pick in R Romero when higher ceiling guys were available). I'm just looking forward to having extra picks and perhaps JP would take a high school pitcher with his first rounder if he knows that he has another first rounder and supplemental picks to take college players. I would certainly be ecstatic to get 3 players like Cecil, JPA and Ahrens again...

parrot11 - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 01:47 AM EDT (#192803) #

Just a question about compensation picks for those who are more knowledgable than myself. Let's say that AJ signs with a top 15 team. That would net us their first round pick and a supplemental first round pick. Now let's say that we also sign a Type A free agent. That would cost us our 1st round pick. So at the end of this, we would still have a first round pick and a supplemental pick. Is this correct?

Not necessarily true, but in theory yes. Let me explain those compensation picks the Jays would get can't be lost. But, if that team signs multiple type A free agents, the 1st round pick would go to the team that lost the highest rated player (note: ELIAS categorizes players not only into types, but also in an aggregate score out of 100), the 2nd round pick would go to the team that lost the 2nd highest rated player, and so on. Say for example the Yankees signed both Texeira and AJ, the Jays would have received a 2nd round pick and a sandwich pick.

Mylegacy - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 01:53 AM EDT (#192804) #

Any chance we could make the sandwich pick Tuna with Mayo?

92-93 - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 02:01 AM EDT (#192805) #

That's how the Jays got screwed with Justin Speier. He was a Type A FA, but LAA then went and blew 40m on Gary Matthews JR who was a higher ranked Type A, so the Jays got the Angels 2nd round pick (Eiland at 88th) instead of the #24 overall to add to #16 Ahrens and #21 Arencibia. But again - it's probably not unlikely that he takes Cecil there anyway.

williams_5 - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 04:44 AM EDT (#192806) #

Burnett did indeed receive a big hand by the home faithful, including a standing ovation and a curtain call.

Maybe he'll be so touched by the T.O. love he'll no longer opt out. Then again, I can't even keep a straight face when I type that.

John Northey - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 09:19 AM EDT (#192809) #

Heard AJ on 590 during their sports news bit and he sounded very much like someone who is moving on. From the bits I've heard over the last few days on that channel it sounds like AJ feels he grew up in Toronto, moving from the dumb prospect (aka Nuke) in Florida to an adult by the end of his Toronto stay. I suspect Cito had a lot to do with that over the last few months as AJ was still doing lots of dumb stuff before that and Cito isn't the type to accept that type of action (his sarcastic wave to the crowd for example). I suspect Cito took him to the woodshed a few times behind the scenes.

In the end, there is a slim shot of AJ hanging around but I do like how JP said AJ's agent is being upfront with him. Suggests that the agent has said 'yeah, AJ is opting out, make a good public offer and don't worry about us accepting it' plus 'offer arbitration, we aren't taking it'. Something he'd have liked Delgado's agent to do and something that I'm sure the Jays wish Al Leiter's agent did years ago.

Mike Green - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 09:23 AM EDT (#192810) #

* Likes to use his own observation for measuring defense, he clearly is not very interested in the defensive metrics available. 'I just prefer to trust my eyes when it comes to defense'.

And presumably, the eyes of his scouts. The GM may have seen many of the players mentioned in trade and free agent discussions (or drafting decisions, for that matter) just a few times.

For instance, when Royce Clayton was acquired last year at age 37, how does the GM know what his defensive abilities are? He had played in the NL for the previous 6 years. He once was a good defensive shortstop. Does he rely on the eyes of his scouts exclusively to determine whether Clayton is still good, or does he consider both the subjective opinions of scouts and the defensive metrics? If it is only the scout's opinions that matter, you have yourself a problem. If the GM bases his judgment on how Clayton looked in the 2 or 3 times that he may have seen him personally in the previous few years, it's a bigger problem.

greenfrog - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 09:36 AM EDT (#192811) #

"it probably does not make much difference to JP where he picks"

JP has sometimes selected players surprisingly early (Romero, Thigpen, Cooper), but other things being equal, I think you want as high a pick as possible. (Imagine if the team had lost out on Travis Snider because they were choosing, say, 24th instead of 14th.) This is especially true for the Jays, who are unlikely to use lower picks to draft expensive-but-talented players like Joba Chamberlain, who ended up being the 41st pick in Snider's 2006 draft class.

On the AJ front, I find it hard to believe that JP and Burnett are seriously planning to work out a new contract over the next few weeks. If nothing else, his agent is probably just information-gathering for the upcoming bidding war.

John Northey - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 09:40 AM EDT (#192812) #

Defense is a tricky beast. The stats we all use mix in both the players abilities to reach and make an out with the positioning done by the coaches. I don't know of any stats that show how a fielder reacts to a ball when hit (ie: do they move in the right direction, do they move quickly, etc.) outside of the final result.

As I've said before, I'd put in place full defensive stat tracking from the lowest minors to the majors. Checking how guys range from where they start, how often they make the outs, how they react to ground balls vs fly balls vs line drives, how well they move left or right, etc. However, when deciding which position to put a guy at I suspect a top scout can tell a lot of that quickly. JP, to this point, hasn't shown an unwillingness to put the right guy in the right position (ie: was willing to put Glaus at SS when needed for a few games despite his not looking like a SS, the extremely high level of defensive competence we've seen in the stats for the team as a whole these last few years) unlike some teams where stuff like Cal Ripken moving off of shortstop due to his not looking like a shortstop despite his being amazing defensively occurs.

I suspect others on the staff mix in stats (given the good results we see overall and the fact not everyone has the eye for telling defensive skill), but the final call for JP comes from his eyes.

Wildrose - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 09:42 AM EDT (#192813) #

Blair weighs in on the new Yankee stadium and the potential revenue boost to the team.

But at least they're at the plate and they don't get caught looking at a third strike, which is lot better than slogging around in the middle of the pack like the Toronto Blue Jays do, treating a $100-million (all currency U.S.) payroll like it's some kind of Rubicon. Geez, Ted, it's only money.

Blair does not really touch on the potential effect of the financial meltdown in New York ( who really knows what will happen) , but he does make some good points. The Yankees have $88 million coming of their books this season, their luxury taxes are going to come down as they can write off stadium building expenses and the team is primarily in the business of selling baseball, not other ancillary products.

The_Game - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 09:58 AM EDT (#192814) #

Funny, 92-93.

MatO - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 10:08 AM EDT (#192815) #

expensive-but-talented players like Joba Chamberlain

Would people stop using Chamberlain as an example of this. For $250,000 more, The Red Sox could have had him with the pick immediately before the Yankees but instead took a college lefty (I thought Theo was a genius!). I'm sure the Sox could have afforded that. He fell in the draft because of injury and weight issues.

R Billie - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 10:57 AM EDT (#192816) #

"Likes to use his own observation for measuring defense, he clearly is not very interested in the defensive metrics available. 'I just prefer to trust my eyes when it comes to defense'."

Were these the same eyes he trusted when he stated once upon a time that Eric Hinske could win a gold glove at third base and Russ Adams would be fine at shortstop?

I'm no expert but I could tell neither had any chance of coming to pass. The Jays ended up spending money (Hinske, Koskie, Glaus, Rolen) and drafting players (no Tulowitzki) around these assumptions and in the end wasted a lot of money and time because of it and are still looking for a long term shortstop which would likely cost close to 8 figures (at least) on the open market.

I can understand the eyes won't always get things right. But when they miss to that degree then you might as well be guessing the defensive abilities of players at random. I'd rather use metrics than rely on those kinds of observations.

Mike Green - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 11:02 AM EDT (#192817) #

For fun, I checked out the 2006 first round on the Baseball Cube. Let's see if I can get the link to work. The Cube lists Andrew Miller as the best pick of the round which featured Longoria, Morrow, Kershaw, Lincecum, Snider and Chamberlain. Beats me...

Mike Green - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 11:09 AM EDT (#192818) #

Ha, it worked. All you need to do is move from "HTML Formatted" to "Plain Old Text" after you've got the link started and then paste in the URL of the link to replace the dreaded "javascript void" in the between the quotations in the "ahref" section.

It's not exactly a wysiwig. Back to the future.

John Northey - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 11:58 AM EDT (#192819) #

Checking the overall standings today I noticed...
Ahead of the Jays: 10 teams
Tied with the Jays (83 wins): 2 teams (Houston & Dodgers)
Within 3 wins of the Jays (ie: could pass the Jays): 2 teams (both 1 game back Florida & St Louis)
Within 4 wins of the Jays (ie: could tie the Jays): 2 teams (Cleveland & Arizona)

What does this mean? If the Jays lose every game left, Houston & Cleveland win all of them, and Florida and St Louis win at least 1 game the Jays could be in a 'safe' drafting position (don't know how they break ties). If one of those 4 bottom teams don't pass/tie the Jays then it could still work out too. That would mean any free agent would cost a second round pick, not a first round pick.

Very, very doubtful that all would happen, the Jays losing all 4 (1 vs Yankees, 3 vs Baltimore) and Cleveland (1 Boston, 3 White Sox) or Arizona (1 St Louis, 3 Colorado) win all 4 left but it could happen. Then JP could feel safe chasing a type A free agent with no fear of losing a strong pick.

Hey, once you know the team is going to finish 4th you might as well grab whatever straws are left eh? Thus if Halladay doesn't win 20, if the weekend is a waste, at least there could be a silver lining.

Glevin - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 12:02 PM EDT (#192820) #

"I can understand the eyes won't always get things right. But when they miss to that degree then you might as well be guessing the defensive abilities of players at random. I'd rather use metrics than rely on those kinds of observations."

I wouldn't. Fielding is very different than hitting stats-wise and there really isn't any stat that is 100% reliable in fielding. There are just so many factors (Do the pitchers on the team K a lot of guys, do they throw hard and get guys to hit the other way, are the fielders around him good, is the grass long, how many Es does his 1Bman cost/save, etc...) I mean Zone Rating has Major league 3Bman ranked Beltre, Hall, Chipper Jones as the top 3. Does anyone think that this is remotely indicative of reality? Is Miguel Tejada the best defensive SS in baseball? These stats remind me of +/- in hockey. Sometimes it means something, sometimes it doesn't.

lexomatic - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 12:22 PM EDT (#192821) #

well glevin, an argument could be made for beltre being the best at 3b... this year

FisherCat - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 02:01 PM EDT (#192823) #

On the subject of WWJP:

Arencibia was up in Toronto visiting Snyder, so they got a uniform on him and had him take BP with the big leaguers. He seemed to impress Wilner at least.

-I did notice some skepticism in the tone of JP's voice on the subject of JPA. I don't know whether to take it as he's not as good as the #'s show or what..

Hill is likely to stay at second, too much to ask him to move to short after the problems he's had this year.

-I'm very glad to hear this directly from JP, because this is the very same point I have posted here a couple of times.

Ryan Day - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 02:20 PM EDT (#192824) #

Whatever he's looking at, Ricciardi & co. have put together one of the best defensive teams in baseball for the past couple years. It's possible that has more relevance than what he was saying or doing 3-5 years ago.

He's had his problems putting together an offence, but I think Ricciardi's earned the benefit of the doubt where pitching and defence are concerned.

Dewey - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 02:29 PM EDT (#192825) #

As I've said before, I'd put in place full defensive stat tracking from the lowest minors to the majors.

Would this "defensive stat-tracking" be done by machines or by human eyes, John? That is, how would the metrics be arrived at? By humans watching and making notes on plays, or by optical machines somehow calibrated to assign values to fielding play? The wish to eradicate human judgement from our enjoyment (well, analysis anyway) of baseball seems delusional to me.

lexomatic - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 02:33 PM EDT (#192826) #

Hill is likely to stay at second, too much to ask him to move to short after the problems he's had this year.
-I'm very glad to hear this directly from JP, because this is the very same point I have posted here a couple of times.

seconded

Glevin - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 02:43 PM EDT (#192827) #

"well glevin, an argument could be made for beltre being the best at 3b... this year"

It's quite possible. But there is no argument that Hall and Chipper are not among the best fielders at their position. A stat that is sometimes right is almost useless.

John Northey - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 03:06 PM EDT (#192828) #

Oh, I'd never want to remove human judgment from the enjoyment of baseball, but if I was running a corporation which has a payroll of around $100 million dollars and variable profits based on many factors I'd try to remove human error from everything I could. A person's eyes can deceive them, as can personal bias'. If you think a shortstop needs to be smaller than 6'2" then a 6'10" shortstop might look poor defensively no matter what the facts are (ie: he might not move much but boy would he reach a lot with a simple stretch that a 5'8" guy might have to dive for). I'd also be using it to improve players, seeing if they are having trouble on ground balls to their left and if so get the coaches to work harder with him on it.

I don't know how many here remember the days when Devon White was viewed as lazy defensively in the outfield. He reached everything in sight but he did so in such an effortless way that it hurt his rep vs someone like Mookie Wilson who would run full out all the time but still never reach many balls that White would. Same thing with Cal Ripken for Baltimore (check how crazy his defensive stats are at times and you'll see) as many never bought into his being at SS instead of 3B. Many other players fit this too. Personal bias is too easy to mix in. As I said, you get guys like JP who seem to really know defense just by watching but it is so easy to mix it up that I'd be the type to use every type of machine possible/affordable to measure everything I could.

Same applies to putting pitch f/x machines into all minor league parks. How better to tell if your hitters are learning the true strike zone (and to teach it to them as well). To see what type of pitches they really have troubles with in what zones. You can guess at most of it, and many professional coaches are great at that, but without solid numbers how can you know for sure?

Again, all of this is in the 'if I ran a team' category. As a fan I just enjoy watching the game, complaining about the umps, and watching the Mookie Wilson's of the world run full tilt at all times. The 1985 Cardinals, to me, were the perfect team for a fan - running non-stop. I know it isn't the best way to maximize wins, but dang was it fun to watch.

Mike Green - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 03:35 PM EDT (#192829) #

Actually, the fact that the Jays had one of the best team defences in baseball in 2008 doesn't mean that the GM should be given credit for having an especially good eye for defensive ability. They traded Glaus for Rolen during the off-season. It was obvious whether you use subjective evaluation or statistical measures that there was a significant defensive gain and a significant offensive loss in that trade.

John Northey - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 03:48 PM EDT (#192830) #

Well, the Jays have been up there for a few years. Using Defensive Efficiency (hits per ball in play, not counting outside the park home runs). Rank is ML wide
2008: 3rd place - .711
2007: 1st place - .714
2006: 8th place - .705
2005: 8th place - .709
2004: 17th place - .698 - year we'd like to forget
2003: 25th place - .694
2002: 20th place - .699 - JP starts
2001: 27th place - .688
2000: 25th place - .684
1999: 23rd place - .687
1998: 10th place - .704 - peak for wins since WS years

Pre-1998 I'd rather forget about (1994-1997 were just plain old painful).

So, what does this say? That since 2004's disaster the Jays have been among the top 8 in defense in the majors every year, when before 2004 they were consistently 20th (from 1999-2003). Could be coincidence but I suspect JP had something to do with that change.

John Northey - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 03:54 PM EDT (#192831) #

FYI: between 2004 and 2005 here are the regulars who changed...
1B: from Delgado to Hinske/Hillenbrand
3B: from Hinske to Koskie/Hillenbrand/Hill
SS: from Gomez/Woodward to Adams with McDonald part time backup
LF: from Johnson to Catalanotto (in truth they platooned both years, Cat just played more in 2005 in LF than Johnson did)

The 3B/1B shift I suspect was the biggest element although having McDonald as a backup at SS even part time would've helped too.

Mike Green - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 04:32 PM EDT (#192832) #

Personally, I'd give more of the credit for the team's general defensive competence to Butterfield's ability to develop infield talent than in Ricciardi's ability to recognize it.

lexomatic - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 04:59 PM EDT (#192833) #

A stat that is sometimes right is almost useless.

or doesn't tell you the complete picture. i disagree with your wording, though not necessarily the sentiment behind it. i don't think those stats are useless, just that you need more information (gb/fb rates, handedness of pitchers etc) that just isn't included. it's contextual, and the context is incomplete. it makes it unreliable, but not useless.

jmoney - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 05:14 PM EDT (#192834) #

Well if you want to give the defensive competance credit to Butterfield. Give J.P. the credit for retaining him.

Dewey - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 05:52 PM EDT (#192835) #

Would this "defensive stat-tracking" be done by machines or by human eyes, John? That is, how would the metrics be arrived at? By humans watching and making notes on plays, or by optical machines somehow calibrated to assign values to fielding play?

I should have left off the final sentence in my earlier post of this (which I do now), because that's what you chose to run with. ( I'm not anti-stats. I'm against over-valuing them, though.) What I am primarily interested in is *how* this tracking could be done in a way that would eliminate the unreliability of human perception. The technology doesn't exist, does it?

binnister - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 06:22 PM EDT (#192836) #

Cito will be around until 2010..

http://www.tsn.ca/mlb/story/?id=250672&lid=headline&lpos=topStory_main

China fan - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 09:05 PM EDT (#192837) #

The Jays also announced today that Ricciardi will be back for 2009. As for Godfrey -- no decision yet.

Chuck - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 10:38 PM EDT (#192838) #

The Jays also announced today that Ricciardi will be back for 2009.

I didn't see that. Effectively announcing that someone under contract is not being fired? That's very odd.

John Northey - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 10:39 PM EDT (#192839) #

I don't know how far the stat tracking for ground balls and fly balls and line drives has gotten. Heck, until this year I didn't notice that they improved the pitch machines to track what type of pitch and break and all of that (the strike zone part has been around for awhile). In theory it should be possible but might be a bit too complicated (expensive) to set up at this time. But right now Stats Inc and others use multiple people to track all the info and mix the data together to get as close to a 'bias free' result as possible. If I ran a team I'd probably make use of that until the technology is strong enough to do it.

Matthew E - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 11:26 PM EDT (#192840) #

The Ricciardi announcement could have to do with his Godfrey-related contract clause. Ricciardi had the option to leave the team if Paul Godfrey wasn't the president anymore; presumably this announcement means that Ricciardi will be back regardless of whether Godfrey is.

greenfrog - Thursday, September 25 2008 @ 11:27 PM EDT (#192841) #

I'm glad Cito will be back. I hope the coaching staff returns too.

As for JP, well, there isn't much to add that hasn't already been said over the course of the year. I think he's done enough to justify keeping him as the GM for another year, but I'm not exactly thrilled about it. The late-season surge was nice, but the team fell out of contention early on - partly because the GM employed a few of the worst players in the AL this year to play LF/DH. On the other hand, Ricciardi assembled a very good bullpen, and some of his draft picks took a great leap forward (Purcey, Romero, Lind, Cecil). So I guess it's all water under the bridge...at least until next year.

williams_5 - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 12:12 AM EDT (#192842) #

I noticed one of the commercials during tonight's game was the classic "Roy Halladay, Age 4," except Vernon Wells was playing Roy's mom. It was pretty hilarious...was this a one time thing? If anyone saw the whole game, were there others like that one?

ayjackson - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 12:13 AM EDT (#192843) #

Bradley Emaus will be playing in the Hawaiian Winter League next month.

Mike D - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 01:29 AM EDT (#192844) #

I read a lot about baseball, but for me, this was nevertheless just a stunning piece by Buster Olney. Last in at-bats and last in innings pitched? (Read the article to see what I mean.)

brent - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 01:50 AM EDT (#192845) #

I gladly welcome JP returning for another season as long as it doesn't mean that the team loses LaCava or any other top assistant. I could definitely understand if someone wants to make an argument to make change for the sake of change. I think another finish below 88 wins would be a disappointment, and JP should be replaced just to let someone else have a turn or chance. I still think that JP needs to trust his young players more and let them learn (even at the cost of service time) rather than relying on some of the older players' track records. We'll have to wait and find out from Tom Tango if older players are regressing faster now without their special vitamins (returning to the natural aging curve).

Magpie - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 07:58 AM EDT (#192846) #

Last in at-bats and last in innings pitched?

Well, as a prominent local GM once said, "Draft schmaft!"

While the Jays are actually 1st in at bats and 7th in innings pitched, alas! - the Jays draftee from that period with the most ABs is Michael Young.

Mike Green - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 09:35 AM EDT (#192847) #

The Yankees can be the dominant team in baseball by popping out 2 useful major leaguers every 3 years from the draft. Most teams need a better return than that from the draft. The Rivera/Chamberlain drafts are particularly helpful, even if they may not rack up a huge number of IP.

From 1997-2003, the Yanks got essentially nobody from the draft and that dismal draft record obviously contributed to where they are now. From 2004-06, they have Chamberlain, Kennedy, Hughes and Austin Jackson, but their last two drafts have been below par. Those good drafts (and the boost in budget from the new stadium) likely will set them up for a nice run from 2009 on.

phifediggy - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 09:57 AM EDT (#192848) #

            W   L   ERA     IP  CG    K  BB  WHIP   BAA
Lee        22   3  2.54  223.1   4  170  34  1.11  .254
Halladay   20  11  2.78  246.0   9  206  39  1.05  .237

           ERC   K/BB   K/9  P/IP   AGS    RS  CW  TL
Lee        2.76  5.00  6.85  14.7  59.9  6.13   1   0
Halladay   2.64  5.28  7.54  14.5  60.5  4.72   0   5

Figure in the cheap wins and tough losses and you have Lee at 21-3, Doc at 25-6. Nearly a run and a half less run support, tougher opponents... Lee deserves to win, but Doc is the best. Just sayin'

FisherCat - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 10:10 AM EDT (#192850) #

Bradley Emaus will be playing in the Hawaiian Winter League next month. Eric Eiland is on their roster as well.

ayjackson - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 10:14 AM EDT (#192851) #

Back to the 2009 Rotation for a minute. With Janssen coming off surgery, a lost season and a season of relief work, slotting him back into the rotation might be a bit too demanding on the arm. Couple that with Cecil's strict pitch count history, and I think you have a perfect match for tandem starters.

The only way that they should be starters out of ST is if they're sharing a rotation spot - Brasey Jancil, anybody?

Mike Green - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 10:55 AM EDT (#192852) #

I agree with the concept of tandem starters, but I believe that it would be beneficial to have Cecil start 2009 in triple A. He didn't exactly dominate there in 2008, and 5-8 starts to begin 2009 would be about right. Perhaps there is another possible tandem partner for Janssen to begin the season?

Excalabur - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 10:56 AM EDT (#192853) #

Zone Rating is about three generations of fielding stats old. Not shocking that it doesn't give the best results, huh?

Glevin - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 10:59 AM EDT (#192854) #

"The Yankees can be the dominant team in baseball by popping out 2 useful major leaguers every 3 years from the draft. Most teams need a better return than that from the draft. The Rivera/Chamberlain drafts are particularly helpful, even if they may not rack up a huge number of IP. "

Not only that, but it takes a better quality of player to even make the Yankees. (Usually, all-star calibre players). They have not produced one in a while though. I thought Cano had a chance, and perhaps he still does, but he took a massive step backwards this year. Also of note, is that I imagine the Yankees have had by far the worst draft position for a decade, signing a lot of top free agents and losing their picks and always drafting at the end of the draft. Since 1995, the Yankees have drafted 7 position players in the 1st round with an average draft position of 24.3 and none higher than 17th. During the same period, the Jays have drafted 12 position players with an average draft position of 14.7 with none lower than 21st. There is no question that the Yankees have drafted hitters poorly since Jeter and are paying the price, but draft position and lack of picks definitely is a factor as well. (The last first round position player they drafted, they traded for Abreu. The last one before that was 2000).

ayjackson - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 11:01 AM EDT (#192855) #

Perhaps there is another possible tandem partner for Janssen to begin the season?

Right after I posted that I thought that Davis Romero might be a better fit out of the gates.

John Northey - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 11:54 AM EDT (#192857) #

Next year's rotation (assuming AJ is gone and no free agents brought in) will be... interesting after Halladay & Litsch, depending on when McGowan is back.

3 slots to fill. Top candidates...

Purcey: did OK at times, sucked at times. Final ERA+ is 78. His ERA if you cut out his two 'start then down' games is 4.84 with 18 walks (11 walks in those 2 early starts) vs 55 strikeouts in 57 2/3 IP. The 7 HR are a concern, but not too crazy a level. I suspect he'll be around a 100-110 ERA+ next year now that the Jays have figured out how to deal with his ADD issue.
Richmond: Just 2 walks in 4 starts with 17 K's in 21 IP giving up 2 HR. He lasted 5 to 5 2/3 IP in every start. Seems like someone who was a bit unlucky on balls in play (at least a hit per inning pitched each start). I think he could be a very nice starter for the Jays in that 5 hole, producing an ERA better than league average over time given that BB-SO and HR ratio.
Parrish: Assuming he returns (I think he is a free agent). The Jays won every one of his starts so far but he wasn't the most effective (5.40 ERA as starter, 7 BB 13 SO in 25 IP with 4 HR given up). A good AAAA guy to have around but I see him as no more than a 6th starter type.
Ricky Romero: JP will really, really, really want to see him succeed and after some success in AAA he will be given a real shot in spring I suspect. Wilder than ideal (20 BB in 42 2/3 IP in AAA) he doesn't give up the long ball a lot (0.76 per 9 IP career wise). Cracked 160 IP this season so will be ready for a full season in 2009.
Cecil: The hot prospect, but just 168 total professional innings so far. Averaged just 4 1/2 IP per start this year so put me in the camp of wanting him to get more innings in AAA. He is just so good though (16 BB 31 K in 30 2/3 IP with 1 HR allowed in AAA) he might not be able to be left down. Sharing a slot with Janssen would be very tempting.
Janssen: Returning from surgery it will be hard to shift him straight back to the majors. He is a Litsch type with low K/9 numbers (4.48 per 9 IP). Mixing him with Cecil would be fun though.
Wolfe: Doesn't want to start, but with a full pen he might have to. Again, just 4.81 K/9 IP but solid control at 2.00 BB per 9 IP.

There is still Davis Romero and other dark horses like Brad Mills (32 K 12 BB in 32 2/3IP in AA with a 1.10 ERA) but those are the guys I figure will be going for those 3-5 rotation slots along with some spring invites from the AAAA/injured ML crew.

Chuck - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 11:59 AM EDT (#192858) #

Wolfe: Doesn't want to start

Wow, I wasn't aware of this. What unestablished pitcher wouldn't want the chance to become a starter? You'd think the sight of Paul Byrd's millions would serve as inspiration.

zeppelinkm - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 01:53 PM EDT (#192862) #

I think Rolen is a pretty significant X factor in next years offence. I know he's walking wounded, and baby, I ain't that strong to swing a bat effectively with one shoulder - but he's a Hall of Fame talent, whether or not he gets there is another question - but look at his OPS by month this year (with # of AB's next).

April: 1.065 (19)
May: .806 (106)
June: .859 (90)
July: .477 (80)
August: .813 (25)
Sept: .843 (81)

It reminds me of a line from another, different song: One of these things is not like the other.

This year Rolen has provided the Toronto Blue Jays 321 AB's of a minimum .806 OPS (a weighted average would surely bring this closer to something like .835 and 80 of the most abysmal AB's you would ever have to endure.

Can the Jays effectively manage his wonky shoulder and get 450 AB's from the competent, not a whole lot but still above average hitting, superstar gold glove version of one Scott Rolen? I think this is a key. Since the Jays are an offence built around having competent pieces but no super stars, they need all their competent pieces to be truly competent. I'm not asking Scotty to revert back to his 900 OPS days, but man, if he could come in over 800 next year, it would be a big help in turning around the Jays offence.

Flex - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 02:41 PM EDT (#192865) #

Seems to me a plausible trade scenario for a starter would have Ricciardi trading Ryan one for one with a team needing a big-time closer next year. Say the Angels after K-Rod leaves. Ryan for Joe Saunders sounds reasonable to me.

Flex - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 02:46 PM EDT (#192866) #

Though I suppose Jon Garland is more reasonable, given the contracts.

Glevin - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 03:24 PM EDT (#192869) #

"Though I suppose Jon Garland is more reasonable, given the contracts."

Garland is a FA. I doubt highly the Angels would give Saunders for Ryan. They could just sign someone like Fuentes or make Arrendondo their closer and probably be absolutely fine.

Flex - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 03:38 PM EDT (#192870) #

"Garland is a FA"

You know, I looked at his contract on Cots and saw the final year of 2008 and recast it in my mind as 2009. I have that kind of mental power.

So I guess we're signing Garland then...

Mike Green - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 04:32 PM EDT (#192871) #

BP's 3rd order standings vs. ordinary W/L contain a real anomaly. The Angels "overperformance" of 15.7 games (taking into account offensive and defensive efficiency, beating Pythagoras and quality of competition) is the most that I can recall seeing. It was a strange season in the AL West with the A's throwing in the towel in mid-season despite being only out 6 games.

At the outset of the season, I said that the Jays path to winning was via the White Sox of 2005 method. They are essentially on pace to match the Sox in the runs scored and runs allowed departments, but will fall 12-15 games shy of the White Sox in the standings due to a one-run game performance. They've gone 12-12 in one run games since Cito arrived (12-19 before)

John Northey - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 04:53 PM EDT (#192872) #

BP's adjusted standings have been both good (feel the Jays are better than their record) and bad (should've been closer to playoffs).

Order 1 method (runs for/against) has the Jays 0.7 wins out of the wildcard.

Order 2 method (mixes in how many runs they should've scored based on EQR) has the Jays 6 games out, but only the Rays and Red Sox are better in the AL (Yankees right on their butts).

Order 3 method (also adjusts for quality of opposition, so if the Jays saw tons of aces but few 5th starters it factors that in) has the Jays 6 games out but again ahead of all but the Rays and Red Sox in the AL and with 90 wins (89.8 if you are picky).

The Angels, as Mike mentions, are the luckiest (#&@ in baseball. O1=87 wins, O2=83 wins, O3=83 wins. They should be the worst division winner in MLB by O2 and O3 (Dodgers in O3 reach 87 wins, White Sox at 85).

So, if the Jays had the Angels luck rather than their usual crap luck then they'd be 21 1/2 games ahead of where they are, or at 105/106 wins and JP getting GM of the year.

Nigel - Friday, September 26 2008 @ 06:07 PM EDT (#192874) #

Wow, I wasn't aware of this. What unestablished pitcher wouldn't want the chance to become a starter? You'd think the sight of Paul Byrd's millions would serve as inspiration

I can easily see an older AAAA type player wanting to maximize his chances of staying on a MLB roster. In this case, I can imagine Wolfe saying to himself that he has a 10-20% chance of being an effective major league 5th starter and an 80% chance of being Brian Tallet. If someone like Wolfe gets shelled while starting, I think there is a pretty good chance that he ends up back in Las Vegas and not the bullpen. It's a different scenario than a young prospect like a Cecil.

williams_5 - Saturday, September 27 2008 @ 06:29 AM EDT (#192877) #

The Star's Cathal Kelly is reporting the Jay's are making a serious pitch to keep Burnett, with the offer being an extra two years on the current contract plus an additional 2 years and $30 million. Link is here, or if that doesn't work, then here:

http://www.thestar.com/Sports/Baseball/article/507488

williams_5 - Saturday, September 27 2008 @ 06:35 AM EDT (#192878) #

Sorry, what I meant was they are offering two extra years at $15 million per year (in addition to him keeping the two years left on his current contract, which stands at $12 million per year).

China fan - Saturday, September 27 2008 @ 09:41 AM EDT (#192880) #

Some of the quotes from Burnett in today's Star article are very encouraging. For example:

"It's about comfort, about being in a situation you're familiar with," Burnett said. "It's really not about the money."

And this quote:: "It's definitely pleasing to hear," Burnett said of the club's proposed offer. "I love being on this team."

Of course this could be just a ploy to lure the Jays into a bidding war. Or it could just be a way of being polite to the Jays. And of course it's true that the Jays cannot offer as much money as the Yankees. On the other hand, maybe Burnett actually does love the Jays and does want to be in a comfortable situation. It's not totally unheard of. (See: Halladay, Roy.)

ayjackson - Saturday, September 27 2008 @ 10:09 AM EDT (#192881) #

The added bonus of that is if Roy does really help to convince AJ to accept below market for four years to stay in a comfy place, then he'd also be obliged to walk straight into JP's office and extend below market for at least an extra two years. I'm sure AJ wouldn't want to see Doc walking out the door in two years for a big payday, if he chooses to stay.

John Northey - Saturday, September 27 2008 @ 11:34 AM EDT (#192882) #

What AJ is saying are mainly things one would expect someone to say, but...

He is supposed to be a bit of a fragile personality (remember how he left Florida) and going to NY would probably be the worst thing possible for him from a career point of view. Baltimore (viewed as ideal for location) could be a negative because if he has any problems on the field it would come home to his wife and family with no escape. Philly has killer fans who boo Santa Claus. Boston? See NY. The west coast is out since his wife doesn't like to fly. Washington is possible, but for getting to the playoffs or getting wins it would suck for him.

I still doubt he'll be here next year, but I think it depends on just how competitive he and his agent feel the Jays offer is (I figure he could get 5 years at $15 per minimum on the market today thus putting the rumoured Jays offer at 1 year and $6 million [$21 if you factor in missing year] below minimum market value) and how comfortable he and his family are with him playing here.

Mike Green - Saturday, September 27 2008 @ 12:44 PM EDT (#192883) #

One of the things that a GM ought to think about before running down a player about his motivation (as Ricciardi did last year in relation to Burnett's injury) is the possibility that he may want the player later.

This contract extension would hamstring the next GM for 2011 and 2012. Let Burnett go, please. He's a fine pitcher, but the dollars don't make sense in the context of the Jays' overall budgets.

92-93 - Saturday, September 27 2008 @ 01:19 PM EDT (#192885) #

I'm more interested in the Arnsberg news from that article - many of you who predicted he was gone after this year appear to have been wrong. And that's very good news.

jerjapan - Saturday, September 27 2008 @ 02:10 PM EDT (#192886) #

The offer to Burnett wouldn't be necessary without the injuries, but given our rotation at the moment, I think that's our best offer. But I don't think it's enough, unfortunately. Burnett just seems a bit too self-interested (and fair enough) to take a hometown discount.

Off topic, but Dave Feschuk's tribute to Cito Gaston in the star today is a very nice piece (from a journo who can be overly negative at times) that reminded me of the single best thing to happen to the Jays this year, and in recent memory in my books - the return of Cito Gaston. How many of us were fantasining bout 1989 all over again during that crazy 10 game win streak?

Hats off to Cito Gaston, classiest manager we've ever had (at least since I've been following the team).

FranklyScarlet - Saturday, September 27 2008 @ 02:14 PM EDT (#192887) #

Arnsberg does a great job preparing the pitchers for opponents. The thoughts he would be gone suprised me.
Just like Butterfield prepares the infield defense, and I agree that he has helped the pitchers with his work in the video room.

I am hearing the new coaches are more old school and believe it's the players responsibility to prepare themselves rather than the coach doing the work? Outfielders defensive positioning? What to expect from an opposing pitcher?

Maybe someone can shed some light on which coaches are responsible for what?

perlhack - Saturday, September 27 2008 @ 04:07 PM EDT (#192889) #

Looks like Kim Ng will get a second interview for the Seattle GM job. I think there are a few of us who expected that she would be a GM someday, but the fact that Seattle is thinking of taking this step, given its recent history of ineptitude, is surprising. Personally, I hope she gets the job.

perlhack - Saturday, September 27 2008 @ 04:16 PM EDT (#192890) #

Regarding Burnett, I'd like to point out that just because he may sign a contract extension with the Jays does not imply he would be with the Jays for the duration of that contract. A trade is always a possibility (depending on no-trade conditions or clauses in the contract, of course). At this point, it seems that AJ is, or may be, the best pitcher available this off-season. If the Jays can provide AJ with an acceptable extension, they should do it. Certainly, there's a risk of injury, but you get that no matter who you sign. This wouldn't prostrate the Jays in the same way that Hampton or Chan Ho Park did their respective teams. It's a risk, but I think it's a worthwhile one to take.

Let's also recall that, through creative accounting, the Jays can offer a nice signing bonus that shouldn't affect their budgeted salary commitments. The Jays can also offer an opt-out clause in the new contract. There are many contractual options available to make a deal appealing to both sides.

Magpie - Saturday, September 27 2008 @ 08:17 PM EDT (#192896) #

I'm more interested in the Arnsberg news from that article - many of you who predicted he was gone after this year appear to have been wrong.

I don't think there were many of us - I thought it was just me! Anyway, I had three reasons for thinking that way:

1) Gaston going out to the mound to visit with the pitcher, rather than sending out the pitching coach. It's old school, but Gaston never did that during his first tour. He always sent out Widmar or Cisco or whoever.

2) Arnsberg seemed completely out of the loop on some of the personnel moves made after Gaston arrived, especially Marcum's trip to the AAA shop.

3) The Marcum repair job. We were actually told that Rick Langford spotted Marcum's mechanical problem after seeing him throw one pitch. Which immediately causes one to wonder why Marcum's regular pitching coach didn't seem to have noticed anything at all. Didn't exactly sound like a ringing endorsement.

On the other hand, you certainly can't argue with the results, the pitchers themselves seem to think very highly of him, and presumably Arnsberg and Gaston are getting to know one another and learning how to work together.

rtcaino - Saturday, September 27 2008 @ 09:51 PM EDT (#192898) #

If I were JP, I would be offering AJ another "opt out" (AKA player option) contract. Offer the current extension, with the option after two years. That will get the Jays over the next couple of years, and AJ could still sign a nice contract two years from now.

This mitigates AJ's risk, while still allowing him to possibly lock in another nice pay day 2 years from now. I suppose two years form now he could still cash in nicely.

Glevin - Saturday, September 27 2008 @ 10:23 PM EDT (#192899) #

"This contract extension would hamstring the next GM for 2011 and 2012. Let Burnett go, please. He's a fine pitcher, but the dollars don't make sense in the context of the Jays' overall budgets."

I agree. Even if they re-signed him for 15 milion over the next 3 years,(which is a lot, too much, for a good, not great, pitcher with the heaviest workload in the league) the Jays would have something like 105 million tied up in 9 players in 2010. ($112 million or so if you count Wells' signing bonus). Now even if the rest of the players are scrubs and rookies, the total salary would likely be one of the top-5 in the league. There is no way Rogers is going to allow that. The real killer is Wells contract.
2009-$10 (with bonus)
2010-$21 (with bonus)
2011-$23
2012-$21
2013-$21
2014-$21

John Northey - Sunday, September 28 2008 @ 12:56 AM EDT (#192900) #

Ahem. Payrolls in 2008 via Cot's Contracts to the nearest million...

Yankees: $209 million
Tigers: $138 million
Red Sox: $133 million
White Sox: $121 million
Angels: $119 million
Mariners: $118 million

That lists 2 teams from each division who are over $115 million apiece. In 2008. Given salaries in MLB have historically gone up by 10% per year then it is a safe bet that there will be, in the AL alone, 6 teams over $125 million by 2010 (not necessarily these 6 but odds are very high that 6 will be). Thus a $120 million payroll for the Jays by then would not be anything unusual, in fact would probably rank them in the middle of the 14 team pack. For a team that has the amazing revenue potential the Jays have (Toronto is a top 10, arguably in the top 5 of MLB for potential revenue based on population in the GTA, let alone the Canada wide TV audience that is possible - this factors in that NY, LA, and Chicago are split markets) that should be a minimum. Is there anyone who would argue that the Jays have less potential revenue than the Tigers or Mariners?

2010 is a crunch year for salaries, but 2011 opens up a lot of space with Ryan, Overbay, and Rolen all off the books by 2011. Others could be traded if needed to open even more. Prospects currently in the minors should be ready for the majors by then at SS (Jackson), CA (many), 1B (Cooper) and P (many) and possibly 3B as well. Not to mention guys drafted in 2009 who are rushed through ala Snider or guys traded for.

The Jays easily have payroll space for AJ as long as they don't do anything silly, such as more $20+ million per year contracts. Also, don't forget that MLB is skyrocketing its shared revenue streams (internet mainly, but also merchandise and international rights) the past few years and that could lead to no shortage of cash for Rogers should they choose to use some of it.

The Jays this year could've afforded a $125 million payroll and made a good profit as I've stated and shown in the past. A $125 million payroll will not be top 5 in the AL in 2009 let alone 2010, let alone in the majors. Rogers can and should open the pocketbook to at least that level by then as it will be close to MLB average. Remember, MLB had over $6 billion in revenues in 2008 ($200 mil per team) and growing.

greenfrog - Sunday, September 28 2008 @ 11:54 AM EDT (#192901) #

I have no problem with the Jays signing AJ to a two-year, $30M extension. It's risky, but no more so than signing Lowe, Garland, Sheets, or pretty much any other free agent starting pitcher. Besides, Burnett really seems to have figured some things out this year. He has been mostly excellent since recovering from his fingernail injury in the spring, and his stuff is still fantastic.

As for the money, I wouldn't worry about Rogers' 2011-12 payroll, which is going to have to increase anyway, as John N. points out. Rogers is a big company with (presumably) intelligent execs. If it wants to hover around the fringes of contention with a $100M payroll, fine. But the company is undoubtedly aware that fielding a legit contender in the AL East will soon require more payroll.

In any event, I think AJ will file for free agency, even if he intends to re-sign with the Jays. I could see some team offering him $80M/5 years, or even $100M/6 years, with the Jays' offer maxing out at around $60M/4 years. At that point AJ will have to decide between the additional money/security of another team and the comfort/familiarity (and Arnsberg/Halladay effect) of Toronto. Pretty hard to turn down the money, I would think.

25 Sept 2008. | 80 comments | Create New Account

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.