Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
This Day in Baseball Thursday Winter Meetings Update
Peavy to Cubs is dead.

Huge deal - huge in terms of volume, not necessarily star talent - between the Mariners, Indians and Mets. J.J. Putz is the centerpiece of the deal. Franklin Gutierrez and Aaron Heilman are other big names changing teams. Summary of player movement:

Mariners -> Mets: Putz, RHP Sean Green, OF Jeremy Reed
Indians -> Mariners: Gutierrez
Mets -> Mariners: OF Endy Chavez, RHP Aaron Heilman, 1B Mike Carp, RHP Maikel Cleto, LHP Jason Vargas, OF Ezekiel Carrera
Mets -> Indians: RHP Joe Smith
Mariners -> Indians: IF Luis Valbuena

In the AAA phase of the Rule V Draft, the Jays lost Anthony Hatch and Ryan Klosterman, and selected Cody Haerther from St. Louis. There was no Jay-related activity in the Major League phase. The AA phase hasn't been updated yet.

And finally, a Blue Jay transaction! The Jays signed Matt Clement to a minor league deal. Quick analysis after the break.

Update (Friday): Raul Ibanez signs with the Phillies for 30/3. Still on the slugger market: Mark Teixeira, Adam Dunn, Pat Burrell, Manny. And Teixeira is the only one who seems to be drawing much interest.

Clement hasn't pitched in the big leagues since 2006, and hasn't had a full season since 2005. He was above average from 2002-2004, but is now 34 and coming off a lot of time missed with a torn labrum. He pitched poorly in 33 minor league innings with the Cardinals last year.

With regards to the 3 team deal summarized above, I like it most from the Mariners standpoint. Jack Zduriencik has acquitted himself well with his first transaction. And man, on days when Ichiro, Gutierrez and Chavez are all playing, that outfield defense is going to be unbelieveable. As Dave Cameron points out, those guys are going to make Carlos Silva and Jarrod Washburn look a lot better.

Mike Carp is a decent prospect who should be ready soon, and the M's have a gaping hole at first base, which is another plus. Aaron Heilman was great from 2005-2007 and had a bad year last year, but if the change of scenery gets him back to his old ways, he could help to make up for the loss of Putz.

From the Indians' point of view, they get a pretty good, relatively advanced middle infield prospect, but give up a solid major league outfielder. This probably means Matt LaPorta will be with the team very soon, with Shin-soo Choo taking the other outfield corner.
Posted by Dave Rutt on Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 01:56 PM EST.
Thursday Winter Meetings Update | 123 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
lexomatic - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 02:20 PM EST (#194795) #
Beg to disagree about the Jays not drafting anyone in rule 5
According to http://mlb.mlb.com/mlb/minorleagues/rule_5.jsp
(and my post a few threads back with links to stats)
Jays drafted 2
RHP Shinskie
OF Haerther
[ Reply to This ]
Craig B - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 02:21 PM EST (#194798) #

Rule 5 AAA selection:

13 Cody Haerther OF Las Vegas (TOR) St. Louis Memphis

An 25-year-old outfielder who hit .250/.311/.347 at Memphis last year.  Looks like a total non-prospect to me.

[ Reply to This ]
Dave Rutt - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 02:23 PM EST (#194802) #
Sorry! When I ctrl-F'ed 'Toronto' on the MLB.com article, I only got Klosterman and Hatch. Will fix...
[ Reply to This ]
lexomatic - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 02:23 PM EST (#194803) #
Also, I suspect Shin Soo Choo (sp?) is now frontrunner for RF in Cleveland
[ Reply to This ]
Dave Rutt - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 02:29 PM EST (#194806) #
You're right, lex. I hadn't realized how well Choo hit in half a season this year.
[ Reply to This ]
John Northey - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 02:38 PM EST (#194809) #
Well, Clement can't hurt if it is just a AAA deal with spring invite.  More cannon fodder until McGowan and/or the kids are ready.  If he works out, great.  If not the dollar cost is minimal.

I suspect we are looking at Halladay-Litsch-Pucey-Richmond and Wolfe or Janssen for the rotation to start 2009 with Clement, Downs, Robert Ray, Rickey Romero, Brett Cecil and Brad Mills in the 2nd wave (ie: any slot opens and any of these guys do well they can slip into the rotation).  Tallet is a dark horse to shift from pen to rotation and I'd bet against Downs moving due to his effectiveness last year in the setup role.

Lots of kids in AAA for 2009 who look good eh?  Cecil, Mills, Ray, and the Romeros are all interesting and Richmond is a useful spare part (I see him as a 6th-8th starter really).  If the Jays decide not to blow the wad on 2009 we should see how all those kids do against ML pitching at some point.

[ Reply to This ]
BrandonTheTool - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 02:39 PM EST (#194811) #
Nice, well... We picked up Hearther off waivers last year from St. Louis, and promptly lost him right back...  I did like him from what I remember last year...
[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 02:56 PM EST (#194812) #
The decision by Ricciardi to fill up the 40 man roster prior to the Rule 5 seems to me to have been a mistake, at least in hindsight.  Eduardo Morlan was available when the Jays picked at 19 and would have been obviously a better choice than quite a few players on the current 40 man; 2009 would have been an excellent year for the Jays to have carried a Rule 5er on the major league roster, and actually it looks like Morlan is basically ready anyway.

The D'Backs picked up James Skelton.  It won't make up for the Quentin trade, but at least it is a start for Josh Byrnes.

[ Reply to This ]
TamRa - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 03:12 PM EST (#194814) #
Morlan's fine but no great loss. We have more bullpen options than we can use now...odds are if we kept Morlan we'd lose someone just as good (Wolfe?) who was out of options or something.

The only Rule 5 pick I would have been interested in is if there was a guy who could have stuck as a backup catcher or outfielder, or a rotation candidate.

I didn't see anyone like that.

Not that there are not some stiffs on the 40, but I don't miss any of the guys we didn't pick.


[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 04:09 PM EST (#194818) #
I'd rather have Morlan than Fabio Castro or Bryan Bullington on the roster by a mile.
[ Reply to This ]
Ryan Day - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 04:18 PM EST (#194819) #
Right, but neither Castro nor Bullington are likely to make the 25-man roster any time soon, except in an emergency. And at least those two guys can be stashed at AAA until needed.
[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 04:29 PM EST (#194820) #
True.  Another good reason to have traded B.J. Ryan.  You didn't need F-Mart coming back to make it worth your while.
[ Reply to This ]
Ryan Day - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 04:50 PM EST (#194821) #
I'd guess Ricciardi's position on trading BJ assumed that K-Rod would sign a much bigger deal than he actually did. With K-Rod setting the market, Ricciardi will be lucky to unload BJ in a pure salary dump; at this point, I'd guess a better plan would be to hang onto BJ and hope he regains his elite closer form, and trade him to someone desperate at the deadline.

[ Reply to This ]
John Northey - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 05:39 PM EST (#194822) #
Unless the Jays have a serious budget crunch (ie: no choice but to cut payroll) then they might as well keep BJ.  If healthy for '09/'10 he'd produce two draft picks for 2011.  If not, well, where else were they going to blow $10 mil given the current situation?  Odds are if BJ is traded that $10 mil goes back into Rogers pockets.  If not it just becomes sunk costs for '09/'10.  So either get something worthwhile or don't bother trading him.

FYI: if I thought that Rogers would allow JP to spend that $10 mil elsewhere then I'd say go ahead and trade BJ but since they won't right now I say keep him or trade for a solid prospect or two.

[ Reply to This ]
TamRa - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 05:40 PM EST (#194823) #
I don't follow that reasoning.

Rodriguez signed for 25% a year more than Ryan makes and Ryan's 2007 was better than Rodriguez's 2008 (and smart GM's are not impressed with the saves record. Rodriguez wasn't even the best closer in 2008)

I'm not saying Ryan's in high demand but that's because of the saturated market, not because of what Rodriguez signed for. Still, Ryan does have the value of being only a two year commitment which you are not going to get from most or any healthy closers of his caliber.

And it's also worth noticing that any GM knows that the first year back from TJ is a bit under your abilities - that Ryan did as well as he did in the first year back is not a strike against him but an argument in his favor.


[ Reply to This ]
Dave Rutt - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 05:50 PM EST (#194824) #
I'm not saying Ryan's in high demand but that's because of the saturated market, not because of what Rodriguez signed for

It seems like you're saying K-Rod's contract has nothing to do with the saturation of the market.
[ Reply to This ]
TamRa - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 06:29 PM EST (#194826) #
No, not exactly saying that. I think it's 3 yrs instead of five because of the market. I think it's as relatively low as it is annually because he's not as good as the saves record would have he and his agent claim he is.

I think that a "top shelf" closer is still something that teams with money will spend $10 million or more annually for - and I think Ryan is that.

But there is an unfortunate circumstance of available options this winter, or was. The Mets did us a favor by soaking up two of the options. Right now there are 2 top shelf guys out there as free agents, and still 3-5 teams who'd like to add a closer.

The question remains - are the teams which are looking teams who will spend at that level for a closer?


[ Reply to This ]
Ryan Day - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 06:40 PM EST (#194827) #
Rodriguez signed for 25% a year more than Ryan makes and Ryan's 2007 was better than Rodriguez's 2008

I think you mean BJ's 2006 was better. 2007 was wiped out by injury, which is exactly the problem - it's been two years since BJ was a closer of K-Rod's calibre, and who knows if he'll get back there. BIlly Wagner signed a similar 4-year deal and got $10.5 million in 2008. Joe Nathan's getting $11 million for the next three years, so is Brad Lidge. Even Eric Gagne got $10 million in 2008, and he hasn't been healthy for years. Rivera's in a different ballpark, but he's getting $15 million a year.

So I'd say it's a bit surprising K-Rod only got a 3-year deal for a relatively unimmpressive amount, considering he's still an elite closer and is only 26.
[ Reply to This ]
TamRa - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 06:47 PM EST (#194828) #
2006, yes.

The thing is, if Ryan wasn't going to get back to that level we'd know it by now. IMO, it's a virtual lock, barring some other injury, that he will.

I think Rodriguez  contented himself with being #2 to Rivera...that's reasonable. Not getting the five years e wanted was somewhat surprising though. But I don't think that fact, odd as it is, says much about whether teams would be willing to take on only 2 years of BJ Ryan.

I do think moving Ryan would be easier though, if the return was an arbitration eligible player that the other team could spare and we needed - so that they would be paying the difference in the two deals instead of the whole $10 million.

Still, as i said, I think we get a better deal by waiting. the only way I'd be for a "dump" is if the $10 million was immediately being flipped into a player who was a real upgrade at a position of weakness.


[ Reply to This ]
greenfrog - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 07:09 PM EST (#194829) #
Apparently K-Rod has lost a bit off his fastball (from 94-95 to 90-91). Not sure if that had anything to do with his relatively modest contract. My guess it had more to do with supply and demand. Lots of closers available via trade and free agency.

I don't think Ryan is a lock, virtual or otherwise, to return to elite closer status. He battled through 2008 and never really dominated. His control was inconsistent throughout the year, and he often barely scraped through to record the save. I agree the Jays should hang on to him for now, rather than sell low. My guess is that he'll have a good year in '09.
[ Reply to This ]
Ryan Day - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 07:50 PM EST (#194831) #
One thing that's odd about BJ's 2008 is that he was less effective against left-handed hitters: 230/373/393 vs LH, 211/292/309 vs. RH. This from a guy with a 175/280/266 career line against lefties. (120/167/120 in 2006!) If he can bring that back to normal, it could be a pretty big improvement overall.
[ Reply to This ]
Dave Rutt - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 07:59 PM EST (#194833) #
I wonder what would bring the greatest return: trading BJ now, or in a year. A team would probably rather be willing to give up more for 2 years of an established closer, but next year's market will probably be sparser (I haven't looked it up). Also, there's the risk that B.J. gets injured again or simply isn't very effective, but there's also the chance that he's great and increases his value by a lot.
[ Reply to This ]
christaylor - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 08:15 PM EST (#194834) #
On the subject of closers: Sabernomics writes this on Kerry Wood. The summary: the Indians are interested in Wood because they think he can start. If Wood will take less guaranteed money for a one year plus and team option for the chance to take a crack at a rotation, that ought to be really interesting for the Jays (and Wood because this team has an open slot and the defense would make him look good).

Personally, I'd love to see the Jays get Sheets for two years and $24m (that was the last rumor I saw for him)... but Wood at $10m or less for one year guaranteed with a team option for $12m the following year, if he'll start? Sign him up.

I like the Clement deal, he's better than any of Ohka, Zambrano or Thomson... the Jays need to get creative and now is the time to lay the ground work for creative things to happen in January.
[ Reply to This ]
Mylegacy - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 10:25 PM EST (#194837) #
"Mother, where's the chocolate cake and ice cream?"

"JP dearest, the cupboard is bare." So will say Ma Rogers.

I say DON'T get rid of Ryan ($10 million), or Overbay ($7 million), BECAUSE - next off-season JP can offer up that $18 million in savings without gutting the team too much for 2010. IF he gives up those contracts now and next year they come for $18 million in cuts - where is it gonna come from?

Trust me girls - the tough times are JUST starting. I bet you my favorite picture of me with Santa, and ALL the used bubble gum I've placed under the lip of my desk over the years, that the Jays - and Baseball in general - is going to be "down-contracting" BIG TIME by this time next year - if not sooner. In this recession/depression the chickens are ALL gonna come home to roost.

You ever seen the pile of sh*t under where the chickens roost?

[ Reply to This ]
TamRa - Thursday, December 11 2008 @ 10:51 PM EST (#194838) #
Well, I'm against cutting anyone just to be cutting now, but I could go for trading Ryan in order to pay Furcal just because I think Furcal - even with his drawbacks - is filling a greater hole in our team (albeit I'd just as soon risk a kid like Arias but that's a digression).

I'm not in favor of dealing Overbay this winter at all unless someone seriously overpays for him. partly for the reason you suggest and partly because I think he'll be more valuable later.

In answer to your question of where the savings come from, IF the jays take a big reversal over and above what the league does, Wells will be dealt even if we have to get little and eat 3-5 million a year for the first couple of years. if all of baseball takes that kind of hit, we won't be hurting any worse than anyone else so it'll even out.


[ Reply to This ]
brent - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 01:49 AM EST (#194842) #

Moving Overbay or Ryan would definitely be selling low on talent. They might as well go into the season as the best they can because of the schedule. Teams will be much more interested in BJ at the deadline if he is having a good year. I think moving a contract with only one year left on it would be actually easier because teams would feel that they are taking on less risk. The player leaves and they can get the picks if they can't sign them longer. The best thing to do in a "crisis" is not panic.

It seems odd that the Burnett sweepstakes are reaching 5 years and 80+ million and no one is saying what a bargain the Jays got out of him in his prime. I have to say that it was a great three year deal. I am really glad that AJ exercised his option though.

Last, I hope JP has modified his stance about only wanting a couple of rookies brought up at a time. This is the year to play the kids. I would rather see thigpen have a legit shot at the back up position than a re-tread like Barrett. Taking a flyer on Clement is fine because it is a minor league deal and he hasn't been healthy more than ineffective.

[ Reply to This ]
92-93 - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 02:16 AM EST (#194844) #
The Phillies acquisition of Ronny Paulino should make Chris Coste expendable. Ship over a reliever and we have ourselves a capable backup C.
[ Reply to This ]
whiterasta80 - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 08:24 AM EST (#194847) #

Can someone please tell JP Riccardi that its ok to fall out of love with players?

John Thompson, Tomo Ohka, Mench, Wilkerson, now Clement... I'm surprised he's not going after Kerry Wood thinking about a #2 starter. Or perhaps Gary Sheffield to bat cleanup and play right.

Not that I don't think Clement is an ok risk at AAA, just that he's had a fixation on Clement for 5 years now and still goes after him when everyone else feels he's washed up.

[ Reply to This ]
Lucky - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 08:59 AM EST (#194849) #
Haerther's stats are mediocre, at best.  Why do you think the Jays would sign him and not re-sign David Smith, who has much better stats and W-A-Y more power, even if just using for a AAA fill-in?  I just don't get how baseball works.  What do some players have that others who appear to be much better not have?  Is it the "who you know" syndrome in baseball like the private sector?  I swear, it seems that teams cut  off their nose to spite their face, just because of a "name"!
[ Reply to This ]
Ryan Day - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 09:26 AM EST (#194850) #
I would rather see thigpen have a legit shot at the back up position than a re-tread like Barrett.

I'd agree, except that I don't think Thigpen has much of a future with the Jays. He forgot how to hit this year, the Jays don't seem to like him behind the plate, and he's got Arencibia and Jeroloman behind him.  I'm not sure he has much more upside than Barrett at this point.

I'd like to see him get a chance, but it's unlikely to have a significant impact either way.
[ Reply to This ]
John Northey - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 09:27 AM EST (#194851) #
What is nice about JP's being 'in love with' certain players is that they were all extremely cheap dollar wise and tied up cash for no more than one season in the cases listed (John Thompson, Tomo Ohka, Mench, Wilkerson, Clement).  Now, the 2 year deal given McDonald was a bit much but again the raw dollars is far less than a bonus clause for some big names. 

Compared to Ash going out and trading for Hamilton and giving him a big deal, and the Green for Mondesi (plus extention) deal these are pretty minor fixations.  Wells was expensive but, like Delgado, was more an upper management decision than a GM decision (I doubt Ash was 100% responsible for Delgado's although I suspect he wanted that deal more than JP wanted Wells).  Gillick had his fixations - Mulliniks DH'ing over Fielder then on the 92 World Series roster as an observer, Alfredo Griffen (love the guy but he really couldn't hit and made a lot of errors), Willie Upshaw kept well past his best before date, addiction to best athlete in the first round of the draft until the 90's (imagine Clemens in the rotation during the late 80's, early 90's). 

As long as JP keeps his 'man love' to guys signed to AAA deals I'm OK.  Even to minimum ML wage deals.  Just avoid the $10 million errors of the Ash era.
[ Reply to This ]
Ryan Day - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 10:38 AM EST (#194852) #
The other good thing about those guys is that Ricciardi is usually quick to pull the plug when they don't work out. People love to point out the folly of signing John Thomson, but he never even made it onto the active roster. (or the 40-man, maybe?)

Unfortunately, that policy didn't seem to extend to Brad Wilkerson, who racked up 200 horrid at-bats.

[ Reply to This ]
Ryan Day - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 10:41 AM EST (#194853) #
In other news, Manny is lonely and unappreciated.
[ Reply to This ]
John Northey - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 10:49 AM EST (#194854) #
No shock there.  $25 million a year is a LOT of money and 3 years at that is one heck of a risk for a team, even with a guy like Manny who is the scariest bat around.

I suspect he'll end up with a 2 year, $50 million deal from a team that fails to get a big free agent - he just has to hope that the money team with no big name isn't Boston as they wouldn't touch him at 1/2 that price now.  I do like the idea of him going to Washington though as that gets him out of the AL.

[ Reply to This ]
Dave Rutt - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 11:06 AM EST (#194855) #
Do you think Manny would take a (large) pay cut for guaranteed years? If I were J.P., I'd throw a 5 year/50mil offer his way, expecting it to get thrown back in my face, but hey, why not? You never know with Manny.
[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 11:07 AM EST (#194856) #
Unfortunately, that policy didn't seem to extend to Brad Wilkerson, who racked up 200 horrid at-bats.

That is what happens when your love is like Brad Wilkerson-

You get a little but it's never enough
On your knees
That's what you get for falling in love
[ Reply to This ]
John Northey - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 11:24 AM EST (#194857) #
Heh.  5 years at $50 million.  If I were JP I'd make sure I had a few very big security guards around me first when offering and then, if by some miracle Manny took it, to protect from a full on Boras/players association attack.
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 11:27 AM EST (#194858) #

According to Rotoworld, the Orioles might non-tender Daniel Cabrera. I highly doubt that they will regardless of how below average Cabrera has been from a results standpoint (even the O's won't undervalue a pitcher in this market), but if by some chance they do, then that's one pitcher I hope Ricciardi jumps on. He seems like a more frustrating version of AJ, but he's cheaper, not a big injury risk, and has great stuff. Arnsberg has done better with worse.

[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 11:48 AM EST (#194859) #
Cabrera missed time at the end of last year with a right elbow injury, and his K rate was way off in 2008.  Caveat emptor.
[ Reply to This ]
John Northey - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 12:03 PM EST (#194860) #
Mentioning non-tenders midnight is the time for it.  The Jays have 4 guys in this situation - Frasor, Tallet, League, and Bautista.  JP says he will offer contracts to all of them most likely via http://toronto.bluejays.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20081211&content_id=3714136&vkey=news_tor&fext=.jsp&c_id=tor

Should be interesting come Saturday to see who is a free agent and who isn't.
[ Reply to This ]
Impossibles - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 12:39 PM EST (#194862) #

Some very interesting names on the non-tender candidate list on mlbtraderumors.com:

Johnny Gomes, Willy Taveras, Chris Capuano, Chris Burke, Marcus Thames, Brandon Backe.

I'd love to see Gomes signed, can DH and play LF, RF, and 1B.  Definately fell out of favor in TB but has a ton of power.

[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 12:51 PM EST (#194863) #

Moving Overbay or Ryan would definitely be selling low on talent. They might as well go into the season as the best they can because of the schedule. Teams will be much more interested in BJ at the deadline if he is having a good year. I think moving a contract with only one year left on it would be actually easier because teams would feel that they are taking on less risk. The player leaves and they can get the picks if they can't sign them longer. The best thing to do in a "crisis" is not panic

I agree completely.  At this point, the Jays are unlikely to contend in 2009.  2010 may be a different story.  Don't dump your assetts to free up salary for an ill-advised run this year only to finish up fourth again.  Hang on to both, deal them if there value goes up, or use them if it doesn't.

Taking 2009 as a year to play young players and showcase veterans, shedding salary and acquiring prospects if possible, leaves us in much better shape to take a real run in 2010 when are injured players are (hopefully) back, especially if the economy recovers by then ...

[ Reply to This ]
Ryan Day - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 12:55 PM EST (#194864) #
Gomes can barely even play DH, but he can hit left-handed pitching (2008 notwithstanding). Ditto Thames, though I'd be more surprised if he's non-tendered. Either could be a solid addition to the bench.
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 12:57 PM EST (#194865) #

I wasn't aware of Cabrera's elbow issues. If it is not serious, then I'd still be interested in signing him. He has great stuff, even though the "10 cent brain" label might be appropriate when describing him.

I don't think Overbay is ever going to peak in value ever again, unless they completely protect him from LHP, and even then he's still owed $14 million over the next two years for slightly above average performance out of 1B. Selling low on Ryan would be a mistake since he can be an elite level closer when he's healthy, but I don't see the difference between keeping or dumping Overbay. He's a replaceable part at best at this stage of his career.

[ Reply to This ]
TamRa - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 02:47 PM EST (#194868) #
Among those listed as potential non-tenders, the name i like best (though I SERIOUSLY don't believe he will be) is Chad Gaudin.

Having someone who can start or relieve well in our current state of flux would be of considerable value.

If I'm JP I've at least called the Cubs to ask if he's really that low a priority for them to try to get in front of the market.


[ Reply to This ]
John Northey - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 05:02 PM EST (#194876) #
Say, does anyone still wish JP kept Josh Banks?  I just looked him up online...
First 3 starts in San Diego - 0 runs over 17 IP including a complete game shutout.
4th start: 6 IP just 1 run.   JP looking really, really dumb.

After that in his next 13 games (12 starts) before his ML season ended...
62 1/3 IP, 27 BB, 30 SO, 12 HR leading to a 6.35 ERA.  Ouch.

81 ERA+ total for the year in San Diego.  A shame as I did hope he'd have a bit of a career but that just might be it.  45 K's in 92 2/3 IP so far in the majors just won't work when you give up 13 HR as well and walk 34.

[ Reply to This ]
damos - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 05:05 PM EST (#194877) #
Burnett's a Yank. 
[ Reply to This ]
John Northey - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 05:08 PM EST (#194878) #
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3765754>AJ signed for $82.5 over 5 years with the Yankees...

Ah well. Sandwich pick plus a 2nd or 3rd rounder. Lets hope he gets no more than 15 games a year in NY.
[ Reply to This ]
John Northey - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 05:24 PM EST (#194879) #
Razen frazen links not going like I want them to. 

AJ cost the Jays cash plus a 3rd round pick in 2006.  Florida took Torre Langley.  http://minors.baseball-reference.com/players.cgi?pid=30930  He is now 20 with a lifetime line of 222/245/352 as a catcher.  Not much eh? 

Interesting to note that the 2006 draft saw some interesting names for the Jays despite not having a 2nd or 3rd round pick and no bonus picks via free agents leaving.
Guys drafted by the Jays in 2006...
Travis Snider (we all know this guy)
Brian Jeroloman (in AAA now, could be backup catcher in 2009)
Scott Campbell (in AAA now, 3B/2B super utility guy probably)
Bradley Mills (rotation candidate)

Considering only Snider is among the first 119 players drafted that year, that Jeroloman is #180, Campbell #300, and Mills #660 (22nd round) I'd say that draft could work out quite nicely despite no 2nd or 3rd round picks eh?
[ Reply to This ]
seeyou - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 05:32 PM EST (#194880) #
According to mlbtraderumors.com, Chuck James has been non-tendered.  His numbers with the Braves last year were horrible, but he was great at AAA and is only one year removed from back to back 11 win seasons.  Fluke/small sample size or indicative of larger problems?  Definitely someone I'd consider pursuing, especially if he'd accept a minor league deal.
[ Reply to This ]
Impossibles - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 06:14 PM EST (#194881) #

Unfortunately Chuck James was released because of many injuries.  I think he's one of those that may re-sign with the team that non-tendered.

[ Reply to This ]
timpinder - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 06:23 PM EST (#194883) #

The good news about Burnett being a Yankee is that the Jays will likely see a lot of Ian Kennedy while Burnett is on the DL.  Unless there's another opt-out clause, Burnett isn't due to pitch a full season again until his next free agent year in 2013.

[ Reply to This ]
brent - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 06:27 PM EST (#194884) #
All the Jays' non-tender candidates were offered contracts (Tallet, Frasor, League and Bautista).
[ Reply to This ]
christaylor - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 06:28 PM EST (#194885) #
I was just about to write, "Cue up the AJ slurs"...

Anyway you slice it, this is bad for the Jays. Sure, AJ could be Pavano 2.0 but he probably won't be and the draft picks we get are the worst we could possibly receive.

The only good thing about this is that it shows that the Yankees don't understand that scoring runs was their real issue last year.
[ Reply to This ]
Impossibles - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 06:28 PM EST (#194886) #

I really thought AJ would not sign with the Yanks as to not insult the friends he has on the Jays.  Didn't expect him to cross over to the evil side.

Or is it a case where all AL East players secretly want to be on the Yanks or Bosox, switch over to the winners for once.

I'm quite dissapointed, he's going to hear a lot of boos whenever he comes to TO.  He thought the Toronto fans could be fickle, he's going to have some serious problems with the Yankee fans.

[ Reply to This ]
brent - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 06:37 PM EST (#194887) #

Ryan Day, what I meant about Thigpen is to be like Joe Lawrence. He just needs to be a body paid the minimum to keep the seat warm for Jeroloman and Arencibia. A player from the Jays' farm system and making the minimum is what you want from a back up. There is no downside to it. If he does well, you would have something of value. Otherwise, he is inexpensive part-time filler. I hope JP has learned not to put so much trust in player track records now after using so many re-treads. Play the kids!

[ Reply to This ]
greenfrog - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 07:57 PM EST (#194888) #
My guess is that AJ was attracted to the opportunity to (1) make a ton of money, (2) stay relatively close to home, (3) play in the postseason, (4) prove himself on baseball's biggest stage, (5) slot in comfortably as a #2 behind CC, (6) be around some great players and coaches.

Those are a lot of compelling reasons. Personally, I don't expect AJ to break down (though you never know). I think he's probably learned a lot about what he needs to do to protect his body. No one knows how he'll perform in NY, but I think he'll be fine. He's not the same pitcher he was in Florida.
[ Reply to This ]
Greg - Friday, December 12 2008 @ 09:48 PM EST (#194890) #

Ty Wigginton was non-tendered by the Astros

Think the Jays will be interested at all?

[ Reply to This ]
timpinder - Saturday, December 13 2008 @ 01:19 AM EST (#194895) #
The rumors have suggested that the Jays were interested in Wigginton.  He's superior to Bautista offensively and IF the Jays were to get Furcal (McDonald being the odd man out), a bench of Scutaro, Inglett, Wigginton and a catcher could be solid. 
[ Reply to This ]
SheldonL - Saturday, December 13 2008 @ 01:32 AM EST (#194896) #
I would definitely welcome a signing of Daniel Cabrera! There's just way too much talent for him to not amount to something. He might just end up being a major tease like Miguel Batista or he could be the next Jeremy Guthrie. I think a minor league deal with mighty incentives (i.e. $5 mil for 200 innings or a sub 4.00 ERA in 100 innings min.) would be a very smart move. At the very least, we could use him in the pen. That 98 mph sinker could make him a Valverde-type closer/setup guy.

I also would like the Jays to take a chance on Chris Capuano. He's coming off Tommy John surgery and will be ready by spring training. He made $3.45 million last year and the Brewers can't resign him for more than 20% less of last year's salary (an obscure MLBPA rule). We could also give him a heavy incentive laden contract. This guy was considered to be among the top pitchers in the NL not too long ago.

I think Chuck James would be a hard signing because he's out all of next season because of shoulder surgery and he only throws a fastball that tops out at 89mph and change. You would need to rehab him AND teach him to throw another breaking pitch. He's clearly got the acumen(pitching know-how) to survive a year and a half with a fastball-change combo

I'm very excited for the Clement deal because he was Cy Young-brilliant in his 3 seasons with the Cubs and he also showed he could pitch in the AL... people forget that he started the all-star game in 2005 for the AL side due to Halladay's unfortunate broken leg and because he was flat-out dominant in the first half of the season.
He also was quoted as saying that he believes that he can compete because he's not about to sacrifice his family life with 3 young kids just to chase a big league dream... I'm excited!
[ Reply to This ]
TamRa - Saturday, December 13 2008 @ 02:02 AM EST (#194897) #
If I could get Cabrera on a minor league deal I would but someone will guarantee him money. Nationals seem like a good bet, probably others.

Wigginton is fine by me in some ways but they say he is awful defensively, I'm not in favor of dumping Bautista for him (both of them split heavily better vs LHP) - he's three years older and will be twice as expensive. He might make some sense as a DH but the roster gets pretty crowded if he's platooned.

Barajas + ???
Overbay, Rolen, Bautista
Hill, Inglett, Scutero, McDonald
Rios, Wells, Lind Snider and

Wigginton? That's 14 and we've only been carrying 13 hitters. Replace McDonald with Furcal same results.

So either Wigginton is your full time DH (and ordinary vs. RHP) while Snider is in the minors or you have a crowding situation.


[ Reply to This ]
92-93 - Saturday, December 13 2008 @ 02:19 AM EST (#194898) #
"I'm not in favor of dumping Bautista for him (both of them split heavily better vs LHP) - he's three years older and will be twice as expensive."

I'm very in favor of this. First of all, it's not a guarantee to be twice as expensive - the Astros non-tendered him because they DIDN'T want to pay him in the 5+ range. I'm not worried about his age on a one year deal, and I think Wiggy is a significantly better hitter than Bautista is, and would even be worth the 2.5m more. He might instantly become our best power hitter, and you wouldn't have to be scared to play him vs. RHP. It's better to spend a mil or two to upgrade from Bautista to Wigginton than it is to retain a back end reliever like Frasor and pay him a million more than a rookie would be making.
[ Reply to This ]
TamRa - Saturday, December 13 2008 @ 03:54 AM EST (#194899) #
First, to be clear, I mean no defense of keeping Frasor and I certainly hope JP has some ide he can include him in a trade since he kept him....that said:

Splits against LHP sorted by age

25
W: .297 .377 .458 .835  (155 AB) - .669 OPS v. RHP
B: .283 .404 .540 .944 (113 AB) - .679 OPS v. RHP

26
W: .222 .292 .407 .699 (108 AB) - .773 v. RHP
B: .256 .366 .421 .788 (121 AB) - .742 v. RHP

27
W: .247 .321 .493 .814 (73 AB) - .765 v. RHP
B: .250 .339 .546 .885 (108) - .648 v. RHP

28
W: .316 .385 .513 .897 (117 AB) - .802 v. RHP

29
W: .284 .367 .567 .935 (141 AB) - .741 v. RHP

30
W: .340 .424 .631 1.055 (103 AB) - .809 v. RHP

So far in his career, Bautista is pretty much a clone of Wigginton to the same point in his, that said....if you think Wigginton can be at least an .800 guy against RHP as he was 2 of the last three years, then bring him on as a DH and leave Snider in the minors to start the season (for a reasonable price)

But, even with his poor defense, I'll be STUNNED if the Twins or Indians or Giants don't give him at least 4-5 million to play 3rd for them so my guess is money will decide it for us.

Actually, while on the subject, I like Bautista being schooled at 1B this spring along with Lind. Bautista as overbay's platoon partner (if he has another year like last year against LHP and Inglett as the primary backup 3B appeals to me.


[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Saturday, December 13 2008 @ 10:54 AM EST (#194902) #
Ryan Day, what I meant about Thigpen is to be like Joe Lawrence. He just needs to be a body paid the minimum to keep the seat warm for Jeroloman and Arencibia. A player from the Jays' farm system and making the minimum is what you want from a back up. There is no downside to it. If he does well, you would have something of value. Otherwise, he is inexpensive part-time filler. I hope JP has learned not to put so much trust in player track records now after using so many re-treads. Play the kids!

Good call Brent.  Really, if we are to contend this year, we have to get pretty lucky - not impossible, but we are a longshot.  So why not take a risk playing young players who may or may not be assets long-term, and signing rehabbing young pitchers who may or may not be assets long-term, rather than signing washed up vets who may contribute this year, but certainly won't be long-term solutions. 

I'd certainly be more pumped about the veteran road Riccardi seems to be on with Clement if he'd just show a willingness to swap vets for prospects when we fall out of the race.  Clement can't hurt, but if he plays well and contributes a bit to us finishing, say, third instead of fourth, what's the point?  You could certainly argue that a good year would equal draft pick compensation if he leaves at the end of the season, but aren't we positioning ourselves to contend soon (realistically, 2010)?  And if we aren't, why all the coin being tossed at the sort of veterans that ONLY a contender needs (Ryan, Rolen, Overbay)?

This off-season Riccardi needs to be creative, and so far, he hasn't been showing much creativity ...
[ Reply to This ]
Wildrose - Saturday, December 13 2008 @ 01:14 PM EST (#194908) #
Blair talks about moving Halladay and the Jays potentially being put up for sale.

It's difficult for Blue Jays fans to envision life without Halladay, but gut instinct surely suggests he will not finish out his contract in Toronto, just as it suggests the Blue Jays will be put up for sale, quietly or otherwise, at some point in 2009.

[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Saturday, December 13 2008 @ 01:48 PM EST (#194909) #
As I said in this thread previously, sign me up for Daniel Cabrera as long as he's healthy. He's exactly the type of cheap high reward risk the Jays need to take in order to have a chance to sniff a competitive team sans AJ, Marcum, and McGowan. IIRC, he has a pretty good GB tendency for a power pitcher, which the Jays defense should be able to help. He'll get a guaranteed deal somewhere, but it shouldn't be too expensive. The Jays should definitely take a chance here, again assuming he is healthy. Capuano would be fine too.
[ Reply to This ]
92-93 - Saturday, December 13 2008 @ 02:32 PM EST (#194911) #
"Bautista as overbay's platoon partner (if he has another year like last year against LHP"

Obivously a servicable 3B should be able to work on his 1B defense, but Bautista looked atrocious in his stints at 1B in September for the Jays. And as of now it seems Lind and Snider are both everyday players at LF/DH, so I would think Bautista would platoon with them rather than a veteran who historically can handle lefties and plays top notch D.
[ Reply to This ]
TamRa - Saturday, December 13 2008 @ 02:32 PM EST (#194912) #
Clement can't hurt, but if he plays well and contributes a bit to us finishing, say, third instead of fourth, what's the point? 

Stopgap. Bridge. Ricky-Ro and Cecil and Mills are part of the future but they are not quite ready yet. There are recovery questions (although I'm optimistic) about McGowan and Janssen. Assume none of those are ready to be a starter with the jays before June for a second. Who's your #4 and #5 starters? Richmond? I like him more than most but do you give it to him uncontested if he does turn out to be an illusion? Who's #5? Davis Romero? (I like him) Bullington? Wolfe? Tallet?

Is it REALLY a bad thing to take a flier on a veteran or two to, at a minimum, give yourself more options if youngsters fail? Let's say Clement does succeed and Cecil is setting the PCL on fire...but the Jays are floating along just under .500 - what's stopping you from dealing Clement in July and promoting Cecil?

Nothing.


You could certainly argue that a good year would equal draft pick compensation if he leaves at the end of the season,

No. Elias works a lot of accumulated stats. No one who only played in 2008 is going to be a Type B.


 but aren't we positioning ourselves to contend soon (realistically, 2010)?  And if we aren't, why all the coin being tossed at the sort of veterans that ONLY a contender needs (Ryan, Rolen, Overbay)?

All three currently on the hook to be a part of that 2010 team you mentioned.

And right now, we don't have the organizational depth to put a player of Rolen's current caliber at 3B in either 2009 or 2010. Arguably (depedning on Cooper) we'd be pressed to replace Overbay on the 2010 team (though I do tend to assume he might be gone by then). If Cooper develops more slowly than he has so far, and we trade Overbay and move Lind to 1B....who's going to be the DH in 2009 or even 2010?

Another signed veteran (i.e. the same thing you are complaining about in Overbay) or someone we have to trade for (Who? At what cost?)

Point is - kicking Overbay to the curve without knowing what you do in his absence is silly.

Ryan IS replaceable, but unless he's costing us the opportunity to improve the team by soaking up $10 million now, there's no reason to "dump" him in a buyer's market. I doubt he'll be here on opening day 2010. But in the mean time, what makes more sense - selling high and getting value? Or "dumping" him because as a matter of principal non-contenders shouldn't have $10 million closers?


[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Saturday, December 13 2008 @ 02:53 PM EST (#194914) #
Will, I agree with nearly all the points you make - my concern is just that a move like Clement sends to me the signal that Riccardi will take the same road he always does, at a time when we desperately need to get creative for 2009.  I'd rather take big risks and rebuild midseason for 2010 if they don't pan out, than take a 'let's field the best team possible and hope to squeak into the wildcard' approach that just hasn't been working.

Sure Clement represents a high-risk, high-reward move, and in isolation, I like it. 

But the sort of moves I'm thinking of are higher potential impact - signing Japanese veterans, trading prospects, high risk free agent signings (although it does seem like the money's not there), converting some of the bullpen talent into the starting rotation, heck, I'd even ponder a four man rotation.  ANYTHING, but business as usual ...

I'm not talking about dumping Overbay and Ryan to the curb ... in fact, I agree with you that we'd be selling low to no end on those two.  Hang on to them and see if they regain value mid-season.

[ Reply to This ]
christaylor - Saturday, December 13 2008 @ 03:36 PM EST (#194915) #
"and Cecil is setting the PCL on fire...but the Jays are floating along just under .500 - what's stopping you from dealing Clement in July and promoting Cecil?"

Sort of off-topic (and not really addressed at you WillRain)... but I really hope Cecil isn't anywhere near the PCL, ditto for R. Romero... I've had questions about the way the organization has been developing players (jerking McGowan around, Lind, to name two) but it'll really tick me off to see good young arms thrown to extreme hitters environment of the PCL. Leave LV to the AAAA guys and the reclamation projects. Failing this, I'd at least like to hear the prospects say in interviews "the org has explained to me that stats aren't the main thing here in AAA"... but even then, I'd rather see Cecil/Romero get shelled in the majors in 2009 and be developed in Toronto than to be eaten alive in the PCL. Has JP commented on the hitters environment in the PCL? You'd have to think he's aware of it and would hope it'd change how he approaches development.
[ Reply to This ]
92-93 - Saturday, December 13 2008 @ 04:19 PM EST (#194917) #
"Ryan IS replaceable, but unless he's costing us the opportunity to improve the team by soaking up $10 million now, there's no reason to "dump" him in a buyer's market."

Well, if payroll really is going to stay in the low 80s range, that's precisely what he's doing. I'd take Furcal/back-end-arm-like-Wolfe any day over Ryan/JMac for the 2009 Blue Jays.
[ Reply to This ]
Glevin - Saturday, December 13 2008 @ 06:53 PM EST (#194919) #
"Sure Clement represents a high-risk, high-reward move, and in isolation, I like it. "

It's just the opposite. The Jays didn't pay him much and he has almost no chance to be anything more than a fifth starter and even that is unlikely. The guy had a 5.23 ERA in the minors (including one over 7 in AAA with a 10//13 K/BB ratio) last year and hasn't been a useful major leaguer since 2005. I have no problem with the move because there is no downside, but you can't expect much.
[ Reply to This ]
TamRa - Saturday, December 13 2008 @ 07:05 PM EST (#194922) #
"Ryan IS replaceable, but unless he's costing us the opportunity to improve the team by soaking up $10 million now, there's no reason to "dump" him in a buyer's market."

Well, if payroll really is going to stay in the low 80s range, that's precisely what he's doing. I'd take Furcal/back-end-arm-like-Wolfe any day over Ryan/JMac for the 2009 Blue Jays.

Sure. IF we sign Furcal. JP has already said he can sign first and cut later if the chance arises. So if we can land Furcal (or whomever) THEN we clear payroll.



[ Reply to This ]
Dave Rutt - Saturday, December 13 2008 @ 09:09 PM EST (#194923) #
Sure. IF we sign Furcal. JP has already said he can sign first and cut later if the chance arises. So if we can land Furcal (or whomever) THEN we clear payroll.

Right, but then teams will know that the Jays need to clear payroll, and therefore the return for Ryan could be less than if he were dealt preemptively. (I'm on the fence as far as this issue goes, just wanted to throw that out there)
[ Reply to This ]
King Ryan - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 03:25 PM EST (#194928) #
This is honestly my last straw with JP Ricciardi.

His failure to trade Burnett at the deadline last year was infuriating, and his justification even more so.   He has made the cardinal sin of a manager in confusing reality with what he wants reality to be.  He refused to deal Burnett under the hopes and dreams that the Jays would go 50-20 and make the playoffs, and/or under the hopes he could re-sign him anyways.  

After we didn't make the playoffs (shocking as that was,) JP absolutely had to re-sign AJ to save face.  Now AJ is gone to a division rival and all we get are these crummy draft picks.

You are fired, JP.

[ Reply to This ]
ayjackson - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 03:59 PM EST (#194929) #
I don't beleive there were any serious offers for AJ at the deadline.  And trades for better pitchers than AJ have returned unimpressive hauls lately.
[ Reply to This ]
Sherrystar - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 04:05 PM EST (#194930) #
King Ryan's post is best  post in this thread.

Enough already of this clown GM. How have Jays fans put up with this guy for so long?

Fire him ASAP and bring in someone, anyone, who can begin back hope and respect back to this organization!
[ Reply to This ]
TamRa - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 04:45 PM EST (#194931) #
Meh.

I think it was a clear mistake not to trade him - JP has an obvious blind spot when it comes to holding his players in July against a long-shot hope (the Jays DID play marvelous ball down the stretch but the gap was too large) - but on the whole scope of being a good GM or not, I consider that a relatively minor flaw.

that said, asuming you once make the mistake of not trading him, commiting $50 million or more to him long term to "save face" WOULD be a firing offense. the Jays don't need AJ for 4 or 5 years and the odds are low he'll still be remotely as effective in 4 years. Frankly, I can think of few moves JP could have made this off-season that would have upset me MORE than resigning AJ for anything close to the market rate.


[ Reply to This ]
TamRa - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 04:53 PM EST (#194932) #
Fire him ASAP and bring in someone, anyone, who can begin back hope and respect back to this organization!

Easier said than done. if hiring a great GM was so easy, everyone would do it and then we'd have to redefine "great"

If you lack "hope" for this team, that's on you - not on the team. I could say it's on the Yankees and Red Sox too but we already know we can't play that game so why even dwell on it?

People who think this team has no hope are people who are chroniclly pessimistic. This team is a drak horse in 2009, to be sure, but there's a lot to like about this team. Anyone who thinks the team sucks needs to look back to 2001 when 3/5 of our rotation was Esteban Loaiza, Joey Hamilton, and Steve Parris.

Yikes.


Look, I'm sure there are better choices for GM out there - I tend to think Tony LaCava is a better choice - if you make sound points about JP's failings I got no complaint. but all this doom and gloom from every corner is pretty laughable. These are not the Pirates we are following here, or the Mariners, or the Orioles.

Folks need some perspective, IMO.
[ Reply to This ]
greenfrog - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 05:14 PM EST (#194933) #
Criticizing JP for not trading AJ at the deadline is ridiculous. How do you know there was a market for his services? Can you recall a single promising rumour from the summer? I can't.

Hindsight is 20-20. At the trade deadline, AJ had yet to consolidate his season. He had started the year with a finger injury and was ineffective in the early going. He finally got untracked in the summer, but it was just a streak; there was no guarantee he wouldn't go cold again. If I recall correctly, his ERA was in the high 4s in late July. The fact that both Sabathia and Burnett signed with the Yankees is just bad luck for the Jays. You normally expect to get a higher pick for losing a Type A free agent, but that's the way it goes.

Moreover, by all accounts JP almost pulled off an Overbay + Frasor - Ibanez trade, which would have netted the Jays two additional high picks when Ibanez hit free agency (he was a Type A as well). Seattle backed out at the eleventh hour, but had the trade gone through, the Jays would have had six draft picks in the first two rounds in 2009, and everyone would be praising JP's acumen.

Baseball is a game of inches; sometimes the front-office game is, too.
[ Reply to This ]
King Ryan - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 06:25 PM EST (#194935) #
"Criticizing JP for not trading AJ at the deadline is ridiculous. How do you know there was a market for his services? Can you recall a single promising rumour from the summer? I can't."

First of all, the reason there wasn't any rumours was because JP shot down trading him right away.  He basically came out from the get-go and said he didn't want to trade him because he thought we still had a chance.  So of course there weren't any rumors after that.

Second of all, who even cares what he would have returned.  Say we get 3 B prospects for him.  That's still more than we ended up getting, AND we can move him to the NL where he might have re-signed instead of going to the Yankees.  And it's not like we can all see the future so beautifully to know what the prospects would have turned out like.  If we trade him for 3 meh prospects and even ONE beats expectations and becomes an everyday player, it's an excellent trade. 

"Hindsight is 20-20. "

Oh balderdash.

Trading Burnett was a no-brainer.  It looks like one now, it looked like one then, and it even looked like one at the start of the season.  Everybody knew he was opting out, everybody knew he was signing with the highest bidder, and everyone knew that the Jays were not making the playoffs.  Everyone, of course, except for the GM with the rose colored glasses who tried to no avail to will his dreams into reality.
[ Reply to This ]
92-93 - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 06:40 PM EST (#194936) #
"Say we get 3 B prospects for him. That's still more than we ended up getting, AND we can move him to the NL where he might have re-signed instead of going to the Yankees."

I'm going to assume you don't mean 3 "B" prospects as people generally refer to them, but rather 3 "C" or worse prospects. If you mean the former, you are insane, because there is no way JP could have gotten that. To put into perspective, the only "B" prospects Sickels gives us is Cecil Cooper Arencibia Jackson and Mills. If you really meant 3 lesser prospects, well then, you are just wrong. Why would JP trade with his hands tied behind his back (2 months of Burnett with his opt-out clause protecting him from injury didn't give Ricciardi much leverage from which to deal) for three average prospects when he can keep Burnett on his team for 2 months and then pick up those very same kind of prospects using the 2 picks Burnett's departure gave the team? In the early going it looks like JP did pretty well with his assortment of early picks in 2007, being able to switch between projectable college guys (Arencibia, Cecil) and toolsy high-schoolers (Jackson, Ahrens, Eiland). Giving himself two extra picks in the top 100 is obviously something JP valued more than being forced to accept some organization's marginal prospects for 2 months of Burnett.

"Trading Burnett was a no-brainer. It looks like one now, it looked like one then, and it even looked like one at the start of the season. Everybody knew he was opting out, everybody knew he was signing with the highest bidder, and everyone knew that the Jays were not making the playoffs. Everyone, of course, except for the GM with the rose colored glasses who tried to no avail to will his dreams into reality."

You can make the same argument over and over again, and still be wrong. And why do you ignore the main point brought out by others? Look at recent trades for Johan Santana or Dan Haren, or the offers for Jake Peavy, and then think about what JP could have gotten in return for 2 months of Burnett when he's protected by a clause that can only screw the receiving team.

Or is it that you simply don't know the Jays are getting 2 picks in return for Burnett?
[ Reply to This ]
King Ryan - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 06:44 PM EST (#194937) #
Obviously I didn't mean "B" in any specific meaning of the term, just as shorthand for not-so-great. 

And I will take 2-3 players over giving JP 2 draft picks any day of the week.  I refuse to believe that we couldn't have had some interesting prospects for AJ Burnett and BJ Ryan.  If I'm wrong I am wrong, but JP didn't even try.

[ Reply to This ]
92-93 - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 06:54 PM EST (#194938) #
"I refuse to believe that we couldn't have had some interesting prospects for AJ Burnett and BJ Ryan."

We could, and we will get them from the 2009 entry draft. JP didn't want to limit himself to choosing from what other GMs are offering - instead he'll make his own decision from a much bigger talent pool.

And you have no way of knowing JP didn't survey the market, realize there were no real substantial offers out there, and then make the decision most of us agreed with to take the picks.
[ Reply to This ]
Dewey - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 06:59 PM EST (#194939) #
". . .  but JP didn't even try."

How do you *know* that?

I am so sick of reading the ill-informed whining (mostly about J.P.) on this site.  So many of you know better, could do better.  You don't know what the hell you're talking about.  You haven't a clue about what he tried or didn't try, and what the context of his doing so, or not doing so, was.   But you know he must be fired.  It just gets tiresome.
[ Reply to This ]
ComebyDeanChance - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 07:29 PM EST (#194940) #
Moreover, by all accounts JP almost pulled off an Overbay + Frasor - Ibanez trade, which would have netted the Jays two additional high picks when Ibanez hit free agency (he was a Type A as well). Seattle backed out at the eleventh hour, but had the trade gone through, the Jays would have had six draft picks in the first two rounds in 2009, and everyone would be praising JP's acumen.

I don't know how one "almost" pulls off a trade - I suspect it goes something like you propose a trade and the other team says no. By that measure, Ricciardi 'amost' traded Rios for Cain, and 'almost' no doubt made numerous trades. I'm sure every bad GM has proposed trades that would have been beneficial but went nowhere. The reason that most aren't praising Ricciardi's acumen is because GM's are generally measured by what they actually do, not by what they are said to have 'almost' done.

Moreover, the major benefit of the trade that never came about that you mention, would have been dumping Overbay's contract which Blair says Ricciardi has been trying to do all off-season. That's a bit of a 'boot-strap' argument when one claims to be due props for 'almost' getting rid of a contract one signed two years ago. It was only a few months ago that one of Ricciardi's supporters was claiming that Overbay and Accardo provide 'considerably more value' than Jon Lester, a claim that no one in baseball would take seriously. Now, Ricciardi is apparently due props for 'almost' unloading Overbay on someone else.
[ Reply to This ]
King Ryan - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 07:47 PM EST (#194942) #
Why are you not considering that whomever would have traded for Burnett would have, by default, been trading for those same picks?  So the value returned HAD to be greater than those two picks.  Plus we'd get players more ready to contribute at the MLB level.
[ Reply to This ]
greenfrog - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 07:51 PM EST (#194943) #
"I don't know how one "almost" pulls off a trade - I suspect it goes something like you propose a trade and the other team says no. By that measure, Ricciardi 'amost' traded Rios for Cain, and 'almost' no doubt made numerous trades. I'm sure every bad GM has proposed trades that would have been beneficial but went nowhere. The reason that most aren't praising Ricciardi's acumen is because GM's are generally measured by what they actually do, not by what they are said to have 'almost' done."

You almost pull off a trade when you negotiate for several days with another team, you come to an agreement in principle, and hours before the trade deadline expires, the opposing GM changes his mind and pulls out. This is more or less what reportedly happened: "According to one source, Overbay was part of the package (along with reliever Jason Frasor) for Raul Ibanez that was nixed by the Mariners at the trade deadline." (mlbtraderumors.com)

That's a far cry from the supposed Rios-for-Lincecum (not Cain) heist that the Jays wanted to pull off last off-season. Neither Sabean, JP or anyone ever suggested that it was remotely close to a done deal.

In any case, the attempted Overbay-Ibanez deal had several (not one) potential benefits. First, as you note, it would have allowed the Jays to dump Overbay's (and Frasor's) contract. Second, it would have given the Jays (a) two high draft picks in 2009 or (b) an effective DH in 2009 (had Ibanez accepted arbitration or agreed to a contract with Toronto). Third, it would have given them a badly-needed veteran hitter for the stretch run. In fact, the Jays very nearly crawled back into the race, even without a credible DH. Who knows what would have happened had Ibanez been on the roster?
[ Reply to This ]
Glevin - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 08:03 PM EST (#194944) #
"Trading Burnett was a no-brainer."

My problem is not just that he didn't trade Burnett, it's that he never trades for players when they have value. Instead, the Jays end up losing them as free agents or signing them to long-term deals after their peak years. He just seems to have no inclination to trade for prospects and holds on to players until their value is nearly gone or until they walk away for nothing. Delgado, Escobar, Lilly, Burnett, and Molina were all lost for nothing more than a few draft picks. For a team that was never really in contention during this time period, that is inexcusable.

[ Reply to This ]
greenfrog - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 08:03 PM EST (#194945) #
"Why are you not considering that whomever would have traded for Burnett would have, by default, been trading for those same picks? So the value returned HAD to be greater than those two picks."

LESS the risk that AJ would get hurt and decide not to opt out, which was supposedly an issue for at least one team at the time (which obviously wasn't a factor in the Sabathia deal). AND less the risk that AJ wouldn't be a Type A free agent--his status was still very much up in the air in July.

Those factors, combined with his injury history and historically uneven performance, likely made AJ a significantly less desirable commodity than Sabathia. I think the perception among other teams was "if we're going to part with some serious talent, we want a proven stud performer in return." I think you're misreading JP's comments. JP simply said (I'm paraphrasing) "we're probably not trading AJ" because the potential return just wasn't there. (There may also have been some wishful thinking on JP's part; namely, that the Jays might re-enter the race, and/or that AJ might still re-sign with the team. But I think those factors were secondary to the weak market for AJ.)
[ Reply to This ]
92-93 - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 08:04 PM EST (#194946) #
"Why are you not considering that whomever would have traded for Burnett would have, by default, been trading for those same picks?"

Because those teams would have been also assuming the risk that he gets injured and wouldn't then opt out. That's why the return didn't HAVE TO be greater than those two picks. So JP chose 2 months of Burnett, the 2 draft picks, and the risk that AJ gets injured and stays for 2/24 (and no picks) rather than receive 2 or 3 marginal prospects.

And read what dewey wrote. It's very important.
[ Reply to This ]
greenfrog - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 08:20 PM EST (#194947) #
"He just seems to have no inclination to trade for prospects and holds on to players until their value is nearly gone or until they walk away for nothing."

Can't believe I'm defending JP to this extent, but you failed to mention Speier and Catalanotto, whom JP let go at *exactly* the right time after the '06 season. The Jays collected a bounty of draft picks, which helped net them Arencibia, Ahrens, Jackson, and Cecil, among others, the next year.
[ Reply to This ]
92-93 - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 08:36 PM EST (#194948) #
Johan Santana - "February 2, 2008: Traded by the Minnesota Twins to the New York Mets for Philip Humber, Carlos Gomez, Deolis Guerra (minors), and Kevin Mulvey (minors).

I beseech you to look into these guys numbers before rambling off on how JP didn't maximize on Burnett's value this year.
[ Reply to This ]
TimberLee - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 08:38 PM EST (#194949) #
I for one am glad the Jays held on to AJ until the end of the season just because I greatly enjoyed watching him pitch. And we'll  see over the next few seasons if management was wise to give him the opt-out clause, to not trade him for whatever little they may have received in the summer (I can't imagine it would have been anybody significant), and to not try to outspend the Yankees to bring him back. I suspect the Jays did very well with their AJ experience, but we shall see.
[ Reply to This ]
CaramonLS - Sunday, December 14 2008 @ 10:30 PM EST (#194950) #
Trading Burnett was a no-brainer.  It looks like one now, it looked like one then, and it even looked like one at the start of the season.

THANK YOU.  About time some other posters start realizing the value of selling at the deadline.

No serious offers?  Yeah, I bet.  No one wanted an 16.5 million dollar pitcher at the trade deadline for their playoff run.  Nope, no one wanted a pay anything for him.  Good grief people, get your head out of the sand and realize JP made a huge mistake with AJ.
[ Reply to This ]
squagles - Monday, December 15 2008 @ 12:25 AM EST (#194951) #
He had an ERA of 4.96 and a WHIP around 1.50 at the All Star Break.  He had $30 million left on his contract.  He had missed at least a month the previous two seasons and had two major reconstructive surgeries in his career.  He tanked on a team competing for a playoff spot in '05 and was asked to leave the team.

I think you're overstating the market for AJ at the deadline.

[ Reply to This ]
Glevin - Monday, December 15 2008 @ 01:38 AM EST (#194952) #
"Can't believe I'm defending JP to this extent, but you failed to mention Speier and Catalanotto, whom JP let go at *exactly* the right time after the '06 season."

Speier and Cat  were both no-brainers much as Marte would have been this year for any team other than the Yanks. Both were replacable and neither would have netted much in the way of prospects at the deadline anyhow. (Not near the prospects you could get in a draft) I'm not saying that every move J.P. has ever made has been bad, but there's a lot more bad than good.

"I beseech you to look into these guys numbers before rambling off on how JP didn't maximize on Burnett's value this year."

So, just because the Twins made a bad trade for prospects, nobody should ever trade a veteran for prospects. I'd still take those guys over two compensation picks though. Mark Mulder was traded for Dan Haren, Kiko Calero, and Daric Barton which was an incredible trade. Does that mean that the everyone should always trade veterans for prospects? Of course not. The point is, that the Jays under J.P. have never traded a to-be-free agent with value for quality prospects. For a team that will only win through a very strong system, this strategy makes no sense. This is not the Angels not trading K-Rod, they had a very real chance to win the world series. This is a team that has never been close to winning but whose roster moves do not reflect that.
[ Reply to This ]
ayjackson - Monday, December 15 2008 @ 02:00 AM EST (#194953) #

No serious offers?  Yeah, I bet.  No one wanted an 16.5 million dollar pitcher at the trade deadline for their playoff run.  Nope, no one wanted a pay anything for him. 

Teams want them, but what we've seen lately in MLB is that they are increasingly reluctant to give up anything but cash for them.

[ Reply to This ]
christaylor - Monday, December 15 2008 @ 03:54 AM EST (#194954) #
Dewey, that is most sensible and sane comment on JP I've ever seen on this site.

It is no stretch to say that most of the criticism of JP on this site has been ill-informed and the stuff of fantasy.

He's made his mistake people but to suggest that he didn't try to trade Burnett or that there was some magical deal out there when Burnett was mostly terrible prior to the last two months of the season is a) revisionist history b) wishful thinking.

Not trading Burnett was not a mistake - I doubt we could have gotten Donald from the Philies for Burnett straight-up. Anything less than a prospect of that level is worth less than the two draft picks. Even with the Yankee signing him.
[ Reply to This ]
christaylor - Monday, December 15 2008 @ 04:00 AM EST (#194955) #
"Who knows what would have happened had Ibanez been on the roster?"

I would bet if he'd been nabbed Snider doesn't get a shot. So not getting him wasn't a terrible thing.
[ Reply to This ]
Glevin - Monday, December 15 2008 @ 04:14 AM EST (#194956) #
" You haven't a clue about what he tried or didn't try, and what the context of his doing so, or not doing so, was.   But you know he must be fired. "

Well GMs do not get fired because of what they try or what they almost accomplish. They get fired for what they do or don't do and the Jays have not been a contender in the 7 years J.P. has been here and are not going to be a contender anytime soon.
[ Reply to This ]
TamRa - Monday, December 15 2008 @ 04:29 AM EST (#194957) #
First of all, the reason there wasn't any rumours was because JP shot down trading him right away.  He basically came out from the get-go and said he didn't want to trade him because he thought we still had a chance.  So of course there weren't any rumors after that.

Right, like ANYONE takes JP at his word - especially rival GMs and reporters.

Second of all, who even cares what he would have returned.  Say we get 3 B prospects for him.  That's still more than we ended up getting,

Not so fast - we get a supplemental pick and a pick likely in the mid to low seventies.

The last time we had a supplemental first round pick in the late 30's, that pick turned out to be Brett Cecil.

As for the lower pick, since JP has been GM the Jays have taken:

Shawn Marcum at #80
Adam Lind at #83
 so there is no guarantee at all that we won't get quality ballplayers out of the AK picks.

And it's not like we can all see the future so beautifully to know what the prospects would have turned out like.  If we trade him for 3 meh prospects and even ONE beats expectations and becomes an everyday player, it's an excellent trade.

The same can be said about the draft picks.

--------------------------------------
On the earlier remarks about what AJ  was doing at the deadline:

he was sitting on 12 wins and a 4.5 ERa. He was on a 4 game stretch (since the all star break) of excellent pitching but over his last seven starts leading into the break, he had been shelled 4 times and had a 6.91 ERA in that span.

[ Reply to This ]
TamRa - Monday, December 15 2008 @ 05:01 AM EST (#194958) #
The point is, that the Jays under J.P. have never traded a to-be-free agent with value for quality prospects.

While not technically prospects, he did better than that:

Shea Hillenbrand for Jeremy Accardo (better than a prospect as a young player with ability that had been major league tested)
Shannon Stewart for Bobby Kielty (who, according to Wilner, he already had assurances he could get Ted Lilly for)

Speier and Cat  were both no-brainers...Both were replacable and neither would have netted much in the way of prospects at the deadline anyhow.

Neither would have Molina or Escobar (who got us Adam Lind in the draft, btw) or Lilly (while we got a guy who's not lighting it up so far out of him, two of the guys in the latest top 50 list were still on the board at the time so it was a pick with potential)

And Delgado had a no-trade clause.


------------------------------------
I think I conceded the point about trading him too easily up-thread. I guess that's because I do sometimes sense JP blinks a bit on pulling the July trigger - but, as some have noted in this thread, that's a purely subjective impression. I withdraw the statement "it was a clear mistake" because obviously I don't know what he was offered - I was too busy considering my argument that even if it were a mistake it was not a firing offense and too willing to concede that point.

shame on me.

[ Reply to This ]
Petey Baseball - Monday, December 15 2008 @ 01:53 PM EST (#194963) #
While being a supporter of J.P. through his tenure, I have always suspected that his unwillingness to trade young prospects for help in the off-season or at the deadline was not entirely by choice. It is entirely realistic to believe that the reason Ricciardi has been so conservative (other than the '05/06 off-season) in his efforts to improve the big club is because other teams simply don't like our players in the farm system enough to make a deal. 

With the exception of Zach Jackson, J.P. hasn't traded away a young arm with any sort of potential for value at the big league level. I find it hard to believe that he hasn't made serious efforts to pull off some sort of major deal involving some of the prospects he drafted like Purcey, Cecil, Lind etc for an extra bat or an arm (Especially since '06 when the expectations for a contending team coincided with a boost in payroll) .  Since we don't know what he tried to do or what he didn't try to do, it seems logical to at least consider the possibility that other teams simply have offered better packages.        
[ Reply to This ]
Dewey - Monday, December 15 2008 @ 03:00 PM EST (#194964) #
Well GMs do not get fired because of what they try or what they almost accomplish. They get fired for what they do or don't do and the Jays have not been a contender in the 7 years J.P. has been here and are not going to be a contender anytime soon.

I was, after all, responding to the assertion that he “didn't even try”.

* * *
The assumption here seems to be, however, that someone else could have done better than Ricciardi.  But we cannot know that, none of us.  It's merely an opinion.  You might be right; but just as likely not.  None of us knows what the past seven seasons might have been under someone else's direction. 

Opinion, and bluster, is not argument.  Long ago, Talleyrand remarked (in French) that whatever is exaggerated is negligible. (“It's a no-brainer!”)  Overstate a view too often and people simply stop listening.
[ Reply to This ]
Ducey - Monday, December 15 2008 @ 03:22 PM EST (#194965) #

I am no fan of JP and was asking for AJ to be dumped at the deadline. However, that is because I felt that the team needed to rebuild. I was asking for Doc and everyone else of value to be traded too.

The suggestion that trading AJ was a "no brainer" is silly. He is not as good a Sabbathia and the prospects from the Sabbathia trade are not that overwhelming. Add in that he had an option for two more years at big $ and this was not a simple salary dump. A team could have traded for him only to have come up injured in the playoffs (or ineffective) and be on the hook for two more years while he sat on the DL. Also, there was a very slim chance they could have made the playoffs or that he might not opt out.

Did AJ have a no trade too? Not sure but this would have further reduced his options.

Add this all togther and I could see JP reasonably take the position that they will just take the picks instead of what was offered at the deadline(whatever that was- if anything).

[ Reply to This ]
TamRa - Monday, December 15 2008 @ 04:46 PM EST (#194968) #
on the point of what JP might have tried to do in terms of offering our prospects for veteran players. It IS true that the system went through a valley in which the better guys had all arrived and the results of JP's first few drafts were not making the top prospects list. It's tough to say whether or not JP looked at Shaun Marcum and said "this guy is a keeper and screw you if you ask for him" or if the other team looked at Marcum and said "why would I want him?"

What CAN be said is that now that we've seen Marcum pitch at the major league level, what stretch run acquisition might we realisticlly dealt him for in 2005 or 2006 that would have been worth it? I doubt seriously any of us want a "do over" on that.

It helps to remember that the Jays have only been spending like and acting like contenders for three years now. What JP might have done to leverage the team into the playoffs immediately before 2006 is a null question.

If you think about who were our best prospects in 2006, you'd probably list Purcey, Romero, Lind, Thigpen, Janssen and Marcum. McGowan was there but he hadn't proven himself healthy yet.

Now, consider who was dealt at the deadline in 2006 and for whom. Here's one example-

Bobby Abreu and Cory Lidle for CJ Henry, Matt Smith, Jesus Sanchez, and Carlos Monastrios

Are we to conclude the Philles wouldn't have prefered Purcey, Thigpen, and Marcum....or that JP considered the price too high? Probably the latter. On the other hand, you can probably agree that the Jays' second tier guys were not as well regarded as those Yankee prospects (albeit, that deal sure looks ugly now, doesn't it?)

What the Jays really needed in 2006 was a SP - Besides Lidle, the SP who were dealt in July 2006 were Greg Mddux (not available to us) Odalis Perez, and Kyle Loshe. Would either of those three have put us in the playoffs in 2006? Would that half season (1/3 actually) from any of them have been worth giving up anyone of those prospects other than Thigpen?

I'm not at all sure there's a "right answer" here. Fans tend to fall into a "do something!" mentality, but that doesn't always jive with the reality of the job.

[ Reply to This ]
mathesond - Monday, December 15 2008 @ 05:04 PM EST (#194969) #
Well GMs do not get fired because of what they try or what they almost accomplish. They get fired for what they do or don't do and the Jays have not been a contender in the 7 years J.P. has been here and are not going to be a contender anytime soon.

After 7 years as Jays GM, Pat Gillick had exactly 1 winning season to his credit. Should he have been fired then?
[ Reply to This ]
John Northey - Tuesday, December 16 2008 @ 01:47 PM EST (#194999) #
Ah, but saint Pat had nothing to start with.  That is the mulligan he is given. 

Ash on the other hand had ....
A) a two time WS winner which had won more than it had lost every year for 11 years outside of the strike year of 1994 (the transition year from Gillick to Ash)
B) the following players who were 27 or less in 1995: Olerud, Alomar, Sprague, Gonzalez, Green, Delgado, Stewart on offense, Hentgen was it on pitching (some other kids but not much) plus Timlin and Woody Williams in the majors (29 & 28 although Timlin is still kicking I think).  In the minors there was Ryan Freel (didn't stick till 2003, 357 OBP), Craig Wilson and Chris Woodward on offense plus pitching had Chris Carpenter, Tim Crabtree, Kelvim Escobar.

So Ash had a potential rotation coming up of Hentgen, Carpenter, Escobar, Williams (blinking stupid trade) and a lineup of Knorr/Martinez (not great but decent backup catchers), Olerud, Alomar, Sprague, Gonzalez, Green, Stewart, Delgado, Wilson and utility guys Freel and Woodward.  A pen of Crabtree and Timlin.  Not counting guys already on the roster like Carter/White/Molitor/Guzman/Cone who were too old for my earlier lists.  FYI Alomar he could've signed in the early part of 95 easily (Alomar at the time wanted to stick around) but publicly decided to delay until after the season.

Not as empty a system as some recall it being eh? 

JP's guys added via Ash's time 27 or younger (* for Gillick guys)
Offense: Hudson, Woodward*, Wells, Phelps, Felipe Lopez, Jayson Werth, Cash, Izturis.
Pitching: Halladay, Carpenter*, Lyon, Escobar*
In the minors...
Offense: Gross, Reed Johnson, Rios
Pitching: Chacin, Chulk, Hendrickson, League, McGowan
Older guys of value: Delgado*, Stewart*, Mondesi, Loaiza

Odd note: A Felix Romero was in the system then - some weird thing about Romero's in the Jays minors as pitchers eh?

So, ideal lineup.... Cash, Delgado, Hudson, Lopez, Izturis, Johnson, Wells, Rios, Phelps, Werth, Gross, Stewart with Woodward* as backup
Ideal staff... Halladay, Carpenter*, Escobar*, McGowan, Chacin with pen of Chulk, Hendrickson, League, Lyon

Both GM's came into the game with a fair number of quality players in the system.  Both made a few trades they regret but it seems clear that Ash had more help from Gillick than JP had from Ash.
[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Tuesday, December 16 2008 @ 02:17 PM EST (#195000) #
I don't agree that Gillick bequeathed more to Ash than Ash did to Ricciardi.  The big pieces that Gillick bequeathed were Delgado and Green.  Alomar and Olerud came with very large stickers, notwithstanding their youth. Ricciardi inherited Halladay, Wells, Hudson, and Rios.  Ricciardi has, in my view, done about as well as Ash did.  They have completely different strengths and weaknesses, of course.
[ Reply to This ]
TamRa - Tuesday, December 16 2008 @ 05:28 PM EST (#195005) #
To take things out of the Jays system, a lot of observers (Jays fans and otherwise) list Terry Ryan as a guy you'd like tto tal to if you were hiring another GM.

Yet Ryan had nothing to show for his first seven years on the field, he had an abysmal record in the draft and had been a very medicore trader. He did steal Santana but he also non-tendered Ortiz.

Until he hired Ron Gardenhire in his 8th year he would have failed EVERY test by which JP has been tried and found wanting (except keeping his mouth shut) and what happened from the 8th year onward?



[ Reply to This ]
John Northey - Tuesday, December 16 2008 @ 05:52 PM EST (#195006) #
Oh, true enough Mike. I was mainly wanting to point out how the cupboard was far from empty when Ash took over, just like it wasn't empty when JP took over. While Alomar & Olerud were expensive so too were killer contracts Mondesi and Delgado.

What really caught me by surprise was seeing the guys that Gillick brought in that were still here when JP took over - Carpenter, Escobar, Delgado, Stewart, Woodard. I'm certain more than one newspaper writer has stated that Ash gave those guys to JP without mentioning how Gillick gave them to Ash.
[ Reply to This ]
ComebyDeanChance - Tuesday, December 16 2008 @ 07:31 PM EST (#195007) #
After 7 years as Jays GM, Pat Gillick had exactly 1 winning season to his credit. Should he have been fired then?

Which 7 years are you referring to?
[ Reply to This ]
Glevin - Tuesday, December 16 2008 @ 07:38 PM EST (#195008) #
"The big pieces that Gillick bequeathed were Delgado and Green.  Alomar and Olerud came with very large stickers, notwithstanding their youth. Ricciardi inherited Halladay, Wells, Hudson, and Rios.  Ricciardi has, in my view, done about as well as Ash did."

This is a huge problem with J.P. The Jays' young talent is considerably worse than it was when he took over the team.


"Shea Hillenbrand for Jeremy Accardo (better than a prospect as a young player with ability that had been major league tested)
Shannon Stewart for Bobby Kielty (who, according to Wilner, he already had assurances he could get Ted Lilly for"

Lilly was a salary dump for the A's as he was going to go from $350K to $1.9 million to $3.1 to $4.0 for the three years he was with the Jays. Kielty, on the other hand was going to make $350K. Trading for a relief pitcher who has had one great year is not a difference maker type of deal. You can't build a core of a team around relief pitchers. (or rather, you shouldn't) and this type of deal happens all the time. Check out, Heath Bell, Cla Meredith, or Justin Hampson for three examples just on San Diego in the last few years of picking up very good relievers for nothing. The type of deals that make a GM are the ones whre he gets Adrian Gonzalez and Chris Young for Otska and Adam Eaton. J.P.'s bestt moves were relatively minor ones (Zaun, Downs) but his big moves, have not worked out and the core of the Jays is no better than it was before he came on. At least, in 2001, the Jays had a lot of players that you could forsee being at the core of a winning team 3-5 years down the road-players to build around. On the Jays right now, apart from Snider, I don't see a single such player. 

"Neither would have Molina or Escobar (who got us Adam Lind in the draft, btw) or Lilly (while we got a guy who's not lighting it up so far out of him, two of the guys in the latest top 50 list were still on the board at the time so it was a pick with potential)"

Escobar would have netted significant prospects. He had saved 38 games and then won 13 as a starter the next year with electric stuff and still only being 27. Lilly won 15 games in his last year with the Jays. Molina hit 19 HRs as a catcher.

"He is not as good a Sabbathia and the prospects from the Sabbathia trade are not that overwhelming."

LaPorta was one of the best prospects in baseball at the time of the trade.
[ Reply to This ]
TamRa - Tuesday, December 16 2008 @ 11:20 PM EST (#195010) #
This is a huge problem with J.P. The Jays' young talent is considerably worse than it was when he took over the team.

With the exception of Doc, who's an exceptional case no matter who's in charge, this claim is flately untrue.
Here's a list of talent in the Jays organization age 27 and below in 2001, and 2008, players in the majors bolded, players with astrick acquired by the previous GM


Fulmer - 26
Simmons - 26
Freel - 25
Woodward* - 25
Phelps - 23
Wells - 22
Lopez - 21
Izturus - 21
Carpenter* - 26
Halladay - 24
Lyon - 21
Koch - 26
Escobar - 25
File - 24
Hudson - 23
Lawrence - 25
Wise - 24
Werth - 23
Cash - 24
Johnson - 24
Chulk - 22 
Rios - 20
Gross - 21
Quiroz - 19
Chacin - 20
League - 18


Hill - 26
Lind - 24
Snider - 20
McGowan* - 26
Marcum - 26
Purcey - 26
Janssen - 26
Listch - 23
Accardo - 26
League* - 25
Thigpen - 25
Coats - 26
Romero - 23
Cecil - 21
Arencebia - 22
Cooper - 21
Mills - 23
Jackson - 19
Campbell - 23
Emaus - 22
Aherns - 19
Rzepzinski - 22
Eiland - 19
Jeroloman- 22
Ray - 24

Now, laying aside Doc, who i would not compare to anyone, and dismissing those players inherited from preceeding GM's (I tried to creat a match as close to equivilant as possible for each player...it's kinda like DC vs. Marvel) crossover battles

Escobar v. Marcum
Koch v. Accardo
Lyon v. Janssen
File v. Purcey
Chacin v. Litsch
League v. Cecil
Chulk v Ray
Romero, Mills, Zep, are overage...

Which group of pitchers had we rather have?

Wells v. Snider
Simmons v. Lind
Hudson v. Hill
Phelps v. Cooper
Quiroz v. Arencibia
Lopez v. Jackson
Cash v. Jeroloman
Woodward v. Campbell
Freel v. Emaus
Rios v. Eiland
Gross - Aherns
Johnson v. Patterson
Wise v. Coats
Lawrence v. Thigpen

Fulmer, Werth, and Izturus are overage

Until the farm develops you can't say for sure - for instance in 2001 Alex Rios looked A LOT like Eric Eiland looks right  - but I don't think there's a huge talent gap either way among the hitters.now or on projectability. And honestly, a lot of these players just don't matter. For clarity sake I'm going to add another reply after this one dismissing all the marginal guys to narrow the focus.

-----------------------------------------------------
Escobar would have netted significant prospects. He had saved 38 games and then won 13 as a starter the next year with electric stuff and still only being 27. Lilly won 15 games in his last year with the Jays. Molina hit 19 HRs as a catcher.

Speculation, just as easy to do about the players you dismiss as not worth much.

---------------------------------------------------
The type of deals that make a GM are the ones whre he gets Adrian Gonzalez and Chris Young for Otska and Adam Eaton

And yet, very often the GM who makes such a deal still fails in other areas of his job - often fails to build a winner at all.

The GM who dealt Victor Zambrano for Scott kazmir...never fielded a winning team.

The GM who made the Adrian Gonzalez deal, also drafted matt Bush #1 overall and has overseen mostly losing teams and has made his share of bad deals.

There's a fundamental flaw in your judgement if you rate GM's based on one big steal instead of consistant records over time.
[ Reply to This ]
John Northey - Tuesday, December 16 2008 @ 11:24 PM EST (#195012) #
The Jays' young talent is considerably worse than it was when he took over the team.

Are you 100% sure of that?
27 and under for 2009 (ie: 26 or less this year) thus full peak still available...
Hitters in majors: Lind, Hill, Snider, Thigpen (well, he is under 27 and played in the majors...)
Pitchers in majors: Litsch, Marcum, McGowan*, Purcey, League*, Accardo

In minors top prospects (just a quick scan of the list...I know I'm missing guys)
Hitters: Aherns, JP Arencibia, Campbell, Fuenmayor, Justin Jackson, Jeroloman, Talley (847 OPS at 19 is always good)
Pitchers: Cecil, Collins, Mills, Ray,  the three Romero's (yeah, there are 3 of them now - JP trying to monopolize the Romero clans)
* indicates was an Ash product who still is under 27

Who did Ash leave behind?
Offense: Hudson, Woodward*, Wells, Phelps, Felipe Lopez, Jayson Werth, Cash, Izturis.
Pitching: Halladay, Carpenter*, Lyon, Escobar*
In the minors...
Offense: Gross, Reed Johnson, Rios
Pitching: Chacin, Chulk, Hendrickson, League, McGowan
* indicates was a Gillick product and was still 27 or less when Ash left.

So, Ash had stars at that time in, um, well, Halladay had a good 1/2 year after his 10+ ERA season and Carpenter looked decent (113 ERA+ after an 81 the year before).  Escobar was flip flopping from starter to closer to middle relief at the time but had  a heck of a year with a 132 ERA+ following two straight years of sub-100 performance.  The rest had minimal playing time to that point so no one knew if they'd be any good (Rios was stinking it up in the low minors then - 263/299/354 in A ball, Wells everyone thought would be good but had two straight sub-800 OPS years in AAA).

The point here is that at the time Ash was dumped the team looked pretty bad for prospects - top development in pitching was getting a guy to go 80 ERA+ one year and 110 the next then back to 80 then back to 110 then... you get the idea.

If JP is fired tomorrow he will be leaving the team no worse off than it was when he arrived.  The big issue is how those guys in the minors today develop - if a few stars come out of it then JP has a stronger system today than Ash left him.  If they all flop, it will be worse.  No one can say for certain though unless you actually thought Rios was going to be a star rather than a budget first round pick as he was viewed at the time Ash left.
[ Reply to This ]
TamRa - Tuesday, December 16 2008 @ 11:36 PM EST (#195014) #
Escobar v. Marcum - Esco has better stuff, Marcum knows how to pitch, wash
Koch v. Accardo - Difficult to tell on JA's health but Koch never had a year that good ans JA was younger
Lyon v. Janssen - Janssen was obviously older, but did much better work, not seeing a big edge
File v. Purcey - Purcey rules here.
Chacin v. Litsch - Jessie has a big edge so far
League v. Cecil - Wash, so far.
Romero, Mills, are overage...Good to have a couple of promising lefty starters coming

Wells v. Snider - Wells is star level guy, Snider has potential to be even better.
Johnson v. Lind - Defense to RJ, Bat to Lind - slight edge Lind, an edge that could grow as he develops
Hudson v. Hill - very similar results, but Hill was already established in the majors - tiny edge Hill
Phelps v. Cooper - Early to tell of course but Cooper wouldn't have to do much would he?
Quiroz v. Arencibia - Again, be damned hard for JPA to NOT win
Lopez v. Jackson - Both highly regarded in the minors, Lopez didn't turn out to be a star.
Woodward v. Campbell - another low bar to surpass.
Freel v. Emaus - likewise, Freel is good at what he does but it's a low impact job
Rios v. Eiland - laugh if you want, then go look at what Rios did in the minors in 2001. Still, in this case the bar is very high looking back.

Werth, and Izturus are overage - Werth has had a spotty career and Izturus hits like McDonald.

I don't see how anyone can say Gord left far more young talent that JP would be leaving if he were fired tomorrow. Even if you do include doc, the total balance would be very close.

[ Reply to This ]
ComebyDeanChance - Saturday, December 20 2008 @ 10:47 PM EST (#195085) #
mlbtraderumors has the elias rankings.

If the Yankees sign Manny, which appears a good possibility, the Jays will get the Yankees' third round pick for Burnett. As the writer notes, pretty weak.

http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2008/12/which-free-agen.html
[ Reply to This ]
ComebyDeanChance - Saturday, December 20 2008 @ 11:09 PM EST (#195086) #
I don't see how anyone can say Gord left far more young talent that JP would be leaving if he were fired tomorrow. Even if you do include doc, the total balance would be very close.

What a bizarre list and a bizarre set of rankings.
Why wouldn't you include Halladay? He was 24 when Ricciardi took over. Halladay alone represents more talent than all the players Ricciardi has aquired combined.

Why wouldn't you include Carpenter? He was 26, younger than Hill is now. He has one more Cy Young to his name than any pitcher Ricciardi has drafted. And Hill is better than Orlando Hudson? Eiland is comparable to Rios? Accardo is comparable to Koch, or even better? Koch went on to win the Rolaids.
Those are just a few. There's rose-coloured glasses, but then there's no glasses at all.
[ Reply to This ]
John Northey - Sunday, December 21 2008 @ 01:01 AM EST (#195087) #
Good ol' Carp.  If JP signed him to a 3 year deal at almost any price after 2002 it would've worked nice - he threw 182/241/221 innings with ERA+'s of 123/149/144 all higher than anything he did before (113 was his peak before that).  Of course, since then over 2 years he has thrown a total of 21 1/3 innings at a cost of $19 million.  He was a classic high risk/high reward guy at the time and he has stated that the pitching coach in St Louis was key in his recovery and improvement.

If Carp added 8-9 wins to the team in 2006 he would've been worth any price as that would've got the Jays to the playoffs.  Of course, then the Jays might not have signed AJ and lost his 21 starts at a 115 ERA+ thus odds are Carp would not have added enough to make it. 

Halladay, when JP took over, was a year removed from his 10+ ERA (record breaking for worst ever for a guy throwing 50+ innings iirc) and few saw him as a sure thing anymore.  If you evaluate the team today vs the team at the end of 2001 without knowledge of how Halladay turned out I doubt many would see him as more valuable than Marcum or Litsch, perhaps the same as McGowan (yes, he was drafted by Ash but almost all his development came under JP for better or worse).

At the end of 2001 the team was very expense and had an OPS+ of 96 with Delgado and a staff ERA+ of 108.  Average age was 28.2 for the batters, 28.5 for the pitchers.  This year it was an OPS+ of 95 average age 31.0 for offense and 122 ERA+ and age of 28.6 for the pitching staff.  So today the pitchers are better and about the same age while the hitters are barely worse and older.  The 2 highest OPS+ guys are signed to 2014 while the rotation has lost a guy at 105 ERA+ and 31 years old.

Heading out of 2001 the top prospect (Baseball America) was Josh Phelps at #36, then Jayson Werth at #70, Gabe Gross at #75, Orlando Hudson at #81, and Dustin McGowan at #98 (Wells was #12 the year before, Felipe Lopez #32, Joe Lawrence #99). 

Heading into 2009 they don't have the current rankings, but the top 5 for the Jays start with Travis Snider (probably a top 10 in MLB), then JP Arencibia, Brett Cecil, Justin Jackson, David Cooper.   Snider has a shot at being the best Jay hitter since Delgado and, as a prospect, is higher ranked than Halladay would've been at the end of 2001 I suspect. 

As to payroll, in 2001 a $76.9 million payroll put the Jays about $35 million behind the Yankees.  Today with a just under $100 million payroll they are at about 50% of the Yankees level.  Figured I better put the two in perspective before someone says "JP spends more than Ash ever did" as he really isn't in baseball terms.

[ Reply to This ]
TamRa - Sunday, December 21 2008 @ 01:59 AM EST (#195088) #
Why wouldn't you include Halladay?

Because it would be laughable to compare anyone to Doc. I both acknowledge his god-hood and recognize that Gord Ash completely tripped over him. It's a once in a career (if that) thing and so I have no choice (given there are no comparables) to say "besides Halliday"

Halladay alone represents more talent than all the players Ricciardi has aquired combined.

Exactly, thus the futility of including him. But you can't possibly believe Ash had any more clue than the 16 GM's who took someone else what Roy was going to be.

Why wouldn't you include Carpenter?

Because Gillick drafted him. It takes no more talent for Ash to pass him on the JP than it will take for JP to pass Doc on to the next guy.

And Hill is better than Orlando Hudson?

Absolutely.

Eiland is comparable to Rios?

Again - can you be bother to look ad see what Rios did in the minors before the age of 22, or not?

Accardo is comparable to Koch

More arguable, but a case can be made.

Koch went on to win the Rolaids.

Which don't mean a damn thing. Did Joe Nathan win the Rolaids for 2008 or did K-Rod? Who had the better year?
Who's better, Halladay or Cliff Lee?

Koch's best year ever (age 25):

78 2/3 IP, 78 H, 18 BB, 60 K, 33 saves, 2.63 ERA, 1.22 WHIP, 193 ERA+

He only had 4 more years in the game after that and was below average in all but one of them. He was done as an important player at 27.

Accardo in 2007 (age 25):

67 1/3 IP, 51 H, 24 BB, 57 K, 30 Saves, 2.14 ERA, 1.11 WHIP, 209 ERA+

Anyone who says those two men are not compareable is simply to blinded by JP hate to take a fair look.



[ Reply to This ]
TamRa - Sunday, December 21 2008 @ 02:35 AM EST (#195089) #
If JP signed him to a 3 year deal at almost any price after 2002 it would've worked nice - he threw 182/241/221 innings with ERA+'s of 123/149/144 all higher than anything he did before

Look again. If he signed him to a three year deal the same winter he let him walk, he would have gotten exactly zero innings in the first year, THEN two good years. (coming off the worst surgery a pitcher can have so obviously not a good bet to spend your money on)
[As an aside, everyone who thinks McGowan MUST be done is invited to check Carpenter pre and post labrum surgery]


If you evaluate the team today vs the team at the end of 2001 without knowledge of how Halladay turned out I doubt many would see him as more valuable than Marcum or Litsch

Virtually nobody... I remember reading multitudes of rants about how all three of Carp, Escobar and especially Doc were overrated busts.

As to payroll, in 2001 a $76.9 million payroll put the Jays about $35 million behind the Yankees.  Today with a just under $100 million payroll they are at about 50% of the Yankees level.  Figured I better put the two in perspective before someone says "JP spends more than Ash ever did" as he really isn't in baseball terms.

Worse than that when you factor in the time difference.

According to an online inflation calculator, Ash's 2001 bbudget, in 2007 dollars was almost $92 million
Virtually the same as 2008 would be in 2007 dollars.

Also, baseball salaries inflate at a rate considerably greater than the general inflation rate. if you use the average annual salary as a measure of the inflation rate, you have Ash spending more money, in relative terms, than JP did.



[ Reply to This ]
John Northey - Sunday, December 21 2008 @ 10:12 AM EST (#195092) #
What do you know, I missing that due to 2003 not being there at all.  So a 4 year deal would've been necessary to 'maximize' Carpenter with the first year wasted.  Crazy eh?

So, for JP to have been 'smart' with Carpenter he'd have had to accept a full year of nothing for millions, then getting 3 years of great work, then 2 years of nothing again.  Assuming Carp would've done as well in the AL East as he did in the NL Central (very big assumption).  Sheesh.  Even a person with perfect knowledge of the future would've had trouble swallowing that at the time.

[ Reply to This ]
Thursday Winter Meetings Update | 123 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.