Absent Jerome Holtzman, would much be said about Jones' 1000 innings and 3.97 ERA? As a closer, he had exactly one season with an ERA under 3.00. If there's a parade, I won't be going.

Man, Todd Jones is the abolute best proof that the closers role is overrated. 

Why did he get so many save opportunities over his career?  Just because he always did?  The role can't have so much pressure that your era jumps to 3.97 when you take it on can it?  I could see Frasor's jumping a point if given that much pressure, but wouldn't Downs, League or Carlson all be capable of being MUCH more effective in the role?

I've always wondered why teams don't let above average relievers rack up saves and then peddle them while retaining their top reliever for the high leverage innings that are most important. 

Which is kind of what the Jays did with Downs / Carlson / League setting up Ryan this year, come to think of it. 

Once you make the appropriate adjustments for the relief role, Jones had charitably 4 good seasons among his 16.  Lucky for him, his best was in 2005 at age 37 with Florida, and resulted in him getting paid an additional $18 million by Dave Dombrowski and the Tigers.  Not one of Dombrowski's finer moments...

"I've always wondered why teams don't let above average relievers rack up saves and then peddle them while retaining their top reliever for the high leverage innings that are most important.  Which is kind of what the Jays did with Downs / Carlson / League setting up Ryan this year, come to think of it."

Which would be a great reason behind trading Ryan! Unless I were a team with a good bullpen away from winning it all, I would never spend money on a closer. The number of pitchers who can close for a couple of years is incredible. I mean, Borowski led the league in saves last year and nobody would take him off waivers this. Every year, there are dozens of relievers who come out of nowhere to suddenly be effective, even excellent for a few years. Downs, for example, was a pretty crappy pitcher until he was 30 and just got the right pitching coach and the right opportunity. There are so many guys like this (Balfour and Howell on TB alone. Darren Oliver was washed up in 1998 and has been a very good reliever over the last couple of years,). It is the part of the team that is most difficult to duplicate but also the easiest to replace. (Look at Cleveland's last 3 bullpen years for ups and downs.)

The only issue with dealing Ryan is that if he recovers further and gets closer to his pre-surgery performance, there's a real chance he'll be the best reliever on the Jays again in 2009.  Downs has made huge strides but I just don't think it's possibe for him to be THIS good again.  Same with Carlson.  League is capable but hasn't exactly been stable year to year.

So you're already down two starters in the rotation.  If you lose ground in the bullpen too...eesh.  Though I suppose Ryan for a starting pitcher might be a posisibe move.

" The only issue with dealing Ryan is that if he recovers further and gets closer to his pre-surgery performance, there's a real chance he'll be the best reliever on the Jays again in 2009."

It's possible, but so is a re-injury. Even trading him for prospects would free up some extra salary which could make a huge difference in signing a good starter if you wanted to go in that direction.

I seem to remember that there were a few people regretting that the Jays didn't hire Dombrowski before or that they wished we had him. That talk went away pretty quickly after the terrible Tigers' start this season.

2 trade scenarios for Ryan, depending on what happens with AJ.

1. Ryan for Brandon Wood (makes sense if LAA decides that Wood is expendable)

2. Ryan for Magglio Ordonez (makes sense because the Tigers want to clear payroll while also adding a closer)

I think it is very possible that Ryan comes back as a top 10 or even top 5 closer, but we have such a bullpen surplus (espescially if Jansen goes back to the 'pen) that it makes sense to move Ryan if we can get one useful piece back. Even while resigning Burnett and acquiring Mags, for example, we should still be able to keep our payroll around 110-115 million for 2010-11 as long as Overbay is traded after 2009 and we either insert Cooper in his spot or move Lind to 1B. This would also give us something of a rotating DH with one very good player not playing every day (which is good injury insurance, IMO).

I seem to remember that there were a few people regretting that the Jays didn't hire Dombrowski before or that they wished we had him. That talk went away pretty quickly after the terrible Tigers' start this season.

He'd still be my first choice.

Not sure where to post this but it seems Bedard's injury may not be as bad as first reported, with no damage to the labrum or rotator cuff but rather the removal of a cyst and some general tidying up of the shoulder.  I know it's been written before by other readers, but I think we should be all over him if he becomes a UFA with an offer that would allow him to recover at home.  It should undoubtedly be incentive-based with a respectable base salary, with the quid pro quo being that we get an option year (or two if we're really lucky) should he return to form.  I know we haven't always had the best luck with pitching reclaimation projects (see Zambrano, Victor), but this is the type of gamble we need to make if we're going to win.  The potential for a 2010 starting rotation of Halladay, Marcum, Bedard, Litsch and Purcey or whoever else has some serious potential.  My only major concern is how he would deal with the media attention in Toronto.  I don't recall the details exactly but I know he hasn't always been on the best of terms with reporters, and I assume the media coverage in Toronto, for a Canadian of his stature, would be slightly more intense than that found in Baltimore or Seattle, though I could be wrong.  Anyways, I'd much prefer a low-risk, high-reward contract for Bedard than a potentially masssssive mistake in AJ.