Batter's Box Interactive Magazine - Call Up The Reserves

The Jays have signed three more players to add depth at AAA or to battle for backup roles in the major leagues. These three players will join Matt Clement and Michael Barrett on the "taxi squad". The three players are catcher Raul Chavez, pitcher Mike Maroth and and infielder Randy Ruiz.

Maroth will join Clement as injury prone players who are trying to get back to the majors. The signing of two catchers is interesting. Already the Jays have Curtis Thigpen, Brian Jeroloman and JP Arencibia to split between AAA and AA. Chavez make four and I assume he knows he is going to be a backup and possibly the first major league call-up if Barajas or Barrett get hurt.

Posted by Gerry on Tuesday, December 30 2008 @ 04:45 PM EST.

Call Up The Reserves | 51 comments | Create New Account

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

ayjackson - Tuesday, December 30 2008 @ 05:27 PM EST (#195311) #

How quickly I forgot about our big Winter Meetings signing, Matt Clement.

lexomatic - Tuesday, December 30 2008 @ 07:47 PM EST (#195317) #

you know... going back to jerjapan..i don't think signing Maroth makes up for the bosox signing Penny

Gerry - Tuesday, December 30 2008 @ 07:49 PM EST (#195318) #

For minor league fans the Reds just released Yuber Rodriguez. here is what BA has to say about it:

As a member of the Blue Jays organization, Rodriguez batted .309/.379/.502 as a 20-year-old in his repeat of the Appalachian League in 2004. But it proved to be a fleeting glimpse of his five-tool talent, as he proceeded to hit .220/.300/.311 in three seasons in low Class A. Rodriguez, a native of Venezuela, signed with the Reds as a minor league free agent prior to the 2008 season.

It is a reminder that statistics at low A or rookie ball can be deceiving.

jerjapan - Tuesday, December 30 2008 @ 08:40 PM EST (#195320) #

JP typically does an alright job with these 'taxi squad' style signings. The two catchers seems to spell the end of Thigpen in the Jays plans, and Barrett could still bounce back offensively.

Ruiz seems interesting, big power in AA and he could spell Overbay against lefties - he might be a worthwhile bat if the Jays go with 14 offensive players, but that doesn't seem likely does it? Sigh ... Really, would we rather have more relief innings split between our top six guys or going to someone like Shawn Camp?

Maroth? Terrible peripherals, not sure how he managed those servicable years a few seasons back. JP loves his lefthanders ...

I just hope, despite JP's protestations to the contrary, that there might be a few million available to sign a solid DH - I still have the feeling that with this economic meltdown, a few sold mid-level free agents may find themselves looking for work and settling for lower than expected deals.

Not the offseason we hoped for so far.

TamRa - Tuesday, December 30 2008 @ 09:15 PM EST (#195321) #

BA's weekly transaction list has us signing Jason Lane too, presumably for AAA.

Which is where Ruiz and Chavez will be and where Maroth will be if he stays in the organization at all.

TamRa - Tuesday, December 30 2008 @ 09:19 PM EST (#195322) #

I just hope, despite JP's protestations to the contrary, that there might be a few million available to sign a solid DH - I still have the feeling that with this economic meltdown, a few sold mid-level free agents may find themselves looking for work and settling for lower than expected deals.

The most commonly reported budget figure is "mid's 80's" - I make the projected payroll at about 80-81 million now.

So, yeah, I wouldn't be surprised to see an attempt to land a guy that's being hurt by the market like Mosies Alou or Ken Griffey or Garret Anderson or Jim Edmunds (who'd have to be platooned) for 3 or 4 million late in January.

I, for one, find Alou quite intruiging.

TamRa - Tuesday, December 30 2008 @ 09:27 PM EST (#195323) #

About the "catcher crowd" i think it breaks down like this:

Majors - Barajas & Barrett
AAA - Jeroloman & Chavez with Thigpen also on the roster and playing all over the field.
AA - Arencebia & some minor league soldier like Quintana with an open door for Luizza or Jaspe or Talley to get the promotion.

Then promotions as warranted. I've seen a lot about JPA at AAA but I think this is clear evidence that he's going to start the year at AA. My guess is that unless he is completely dominating AA he'll stay there right up until the all star game in mid/late June and then move up to AAA...and if that creats crowding there then Chavez can easily be cut.

rpriske - Wednesday, December 31 2008 @ 08:27 AM EST (#195330) #

If they throw money at someone to DH, what happens to Snider? Back to AAA?

John Northey - Wednesday, December 31 2008 @ 09:27 AM EST (#195331) #

New guy stats...
Raul Chavez: 259/287/319 for the Pirates, 223/260/292 lifetime
Mike Maroth: 5.05 lifetime ERA, 7 2/3 IP last year in AAA
Randy Ruiz: 274/338/355 last year (first time in majors, just 62 AB) 302/376/523 in minors
Jason Lane: 241/314/457 lifetime majors, 286/367/508 lifetime minors in AAA for Boston & NYY last year

A whole lot of 'whatever' there. All look like AAA filler to me, but every team needs them.

Glevin - Wednesday, December 31 2008 @ 10:46 AM EST (#195333) #

"If they throw money at someone to DH, what happens to Snider? Back to AAA?"

Yeah, which I think would be best anyway. His K/BB ratio in his 4 leagues last year was
A ball- 4.4:1
AA- 2.23:1
AAA- 4:1
Majors- 4.6:1

I think Snider is probably going to be a tremendous hitter, but he could definitely use more time in the minors. I really believe the Jays should trade for someone who is being blocked in their own system and give them a shot at DH.

SK in NJ - Wednesday, December 31 2008 @ 11:16 AM EST (#195336) #

Michael Barrett seems like the only player signed recently that might have a spot on the roster all but guaranteed to him based on the alternatives (or lack thereof). Everyone else looks like minor league filler at best.

If Clement and/or Maroth are in the 2009 MLB rotation, it will be pretty darn sad. Clement looks like he's toast given his age and recent surgery, while Maroth was never that good to begin with. Clearly the Jays have better options than those two. Even guys like Davis Romero and Richmond would be better.

I agree with trying to find a DH so that Snider can start the year in AAA. It has nothing to do with service time. I simply don't think Snider is ready yet. Plugging an underachiever who hasn't been given a chance yet(McPherson?) or a cheap veteran (Alou, Floyd, etc) in that spot for a few months is worth it in my book.

ayjackson - Wednesday, December 31 2008 @ 11:33 AM EST (#195338) #

Free Travis Snider!

Pistol - Wednesday, December 31 2008 @ 11:52 AM EST (#195339) #

I've seen a lot about JPA at AAA but I think this is clear evidence that he's going to start the year at AA.

I don't think signing a journeyman to a minor league contract is impacting Arencibia. They should put him where they think he needs to be (and given that he was called up to AAA last year I think that's what it'll be) and then fill in around him. And I'd be surprised if Jeroloman is playing at a higher level than Arencibia this year.

Arencibia could very well start in AA, but I don't think Chavez is going to block him (although I'm not sure if that's what WillRain was saying).

lexomatic - Wednesday, December 31 2008 @ 12:42 PM EST (#195340) #

I, for one, find Alou quite intruiging.

i think he's the best fit... DH'ing MIGHT keep him healthy enough to play 100+ games.. he does provide the potential to relieve the odd lefty bat (Lind in LF, Overbay in 1b by moving Lind) as well. and the guy seems like he can still hit for an 850 OPS or so.

TamRa - Wednesday, December 31 2008 @ 04:14 PM EST (#195342) #

Nono, I wasn't saying Chavez would block him - Chavez is as disposable as Fasano was last year.I was saying that I thought signing not one but two veterans was an indication that the Jays managment at this point envisions JPA starting the year in AA. I assume he could change their minds in Spring Training and if so Chavez is an irrelevancy to that decesion.

My thinking though, and I'd hope the Jays thinking as well, is that for an obvious hacker who has issues with plate discipline, it's probably not best, psychologically, to start him off in the PCL (where the temptation would be to swing from his heels in an offensive league)

In fact...I could see a reasonable argument for not spending much time at all in AAA for such a player.3 months in AA, 2 months in AAA and September in the bigs or some such. not for every guy, but for a guy who's bat is not in question but just needs discipline, I could see that.

christaylor - Wednesday, December 31 2008 @ 05:26 PM EST (#195344) #

I hate to bring this up (but the exchange over at THT has him on my mind)... Alou is 42 and essentially didn't play last year. There's a better player out there who didn't play last year and while he's left handed, he can certainly hit lefties.

There's a multitude of reasons not to bring said player in (exhibit a: Game of Shadows) but the fact that we're discussing Alou (I agree Alou intriguing and sounds like a good idea depending on salary and health) and not this other player, just ticks me off. I hope someone investigates why this player wasn't employed last year despite rumors he'd play for charity... this player not getting a job smells like collusion, if not collusion, then at least implied threats from Selig (who is more tainted than this player in my mind).

Phew... I got through that without mentioning that name that sets people off.

Secondly, what about Sosa? He crushed lefties when he was in TEX in 2007, could probably play LF in a pinch and is younger and healthier than Alou. He'd almost certainly be cheaper too - he wants playing time, so if the idea is to keep Snider down in AAA until he forces his way in, Sosa could be lured with the idea that he'll have the everyday DH job until a) he loses it or b) at least the all-star break (at which time the JP could offer to try to trade him if Snider is tearing up AAA and needs a call up).

That said, I've always had a soft spot for slamming Sammy as I was rooting for him in the 1998 race to top Maris... so my judgment is probably suspect here.

TamRa - Wednesday, December 31 2008 @ 09:35 PM EST (#195348) #

The simple answer is that Alou is, at this point, and for a few years now, a better hitter than Sosa.

At the age of 40, Alou posted a 138 OPS. That was the 4th consecutive year he was over 130. He also was a very good hitter against RHP while being a monster vs LHP those last three years (and more balanced in 2004)

By contrast, in the last three years previous to his missed year, Sosa's OPS+ was 102,78, and 113
And he sucked exceedingly hard all three seasons vs. RHP

VBF - Thursday, January 01 2009 @ 12:13 AM EST (#195349) #

this player not getting a job smells like collusion, if not collusion, then at least implied threats from Selig (who is more tainted than this player in my mind).

Quite possibly. Barry Bonds isn't a member of the MLBPA which makes him an easier target. If he was a member, I'm not sure if it could be pulled off.

SheldonL - Thursday, January 01 2009 @ 07:59 PM EST (#195353) #

Have we really signed Jason Lane? I really hope so because I think that he could be a Jack Cust for us. The season after his 25 homer season, he struggled with the bat but his walk rate really picked up. Maybe with a strong spring and renewed confidence, he can put up good stats for us as we wait for Travis Snider who I think hasn't faced enough AAA competition to render him major-league ready.

I also want to defend J.P in this thread because I'm worried that the other thread might instantly become inactive and my words will fall on deaf ears.

I think people unfairly judge J.P. He came in with a platform to compete with a $50 mil payroll; and at the time he would have been able to because inflation in baseball has really picked up since but we all forget that he had a huge albatross in Delgado's contract. People also fail to realize that our stars from the 2001 season really stank after that for the rest of their careers. Shannon Stewart had a couple of good seasons and has since fallen off the map. He definitely wasn't worth the $6 million a year that he then thought he was worth. Brad Fullmer (who I love!!) absolutely stank after 2002. Jose Cruz won a Gold Glove with SanFran but did absolutely nothing with the bat ever again. Alex Gonzalez likewise had his career crumble. I remember being very upset when we paid the hated Yankees some $13 mil to take Mondesi, a move that possibly burned any bridge between Ricciardi and Cashman! It was similar to paying the bank $50,000 to foreclose your mortgage!
Billy Koch imploded after we dealt him for Eric Hinske which turned out to be a hell of a deal!

He currently has a pretty good core of young prospects in Arencibia, Cecil, Snider, Jeroloman, Purcey and Lind. Catchers are hard to develop so we really shouldn't expect the world out of either Jeroloman or Arencibia. But his inability to produce a major-league calibre catcher mustn't be considered a failure since hitting catchers are very rare let alone those who can also field well!

He's drafted some very capable MLB players in Hill, Marcum, Janssen and an incredible pick in Litsch who are currently major parts of the current roster.
He also parlayed some of his picks - Bush, Adam Petersen, Zack Jackson - in trades for Overbay and Hillenbrand. Both of these players have more than paid enough for what J.P gave up to get them.

He's also done a good job of signing young players. Somehow, he's done the impossible by convincing Roy Halladay to be with us this entire time at a below-market price. He signed Wells and Hinske to very payroll-friendly deals in 2002. One panned out enough to negate the loss of the other. Since, he's locked up Rios and Hill to very good deals.
In his forays into the FA market, he's signed Burnett to what turned out to be a very good deal, he's also signed vital role players like Speier, Miguel Batista, Catalanotto, Bengie Molina (one electric year for our catchers; and Bengie was pretty good too), Dave berg and Mike Bordick.

People seem to talk ill of his trades but he's made some pretty good ones. He traded Adam Petersen for Shea Hillenbrand when Delgado walked; and although Hillenbrand was no David Ortiz, he produced enough for the price $2.6 mil and given what we gave up for him. Without Hillenbrand just imagine how bad that offence would have been.

He had to deal Orlando Hudson before arbitration made up pay through the nose for him so he packaged him and Batista for Glaus who provided us with 2 very good years.
Glaus was subsequently dealt for two years of Rolen and granted so far we haven't gotten what we've paid for but Rolen does have two more years to either become J.P's biggest bust or another gem.
The Kielty for Lilly deal was absolutely genius and very good for us.

The staff has also done a good job giving a guys like Reed Johnson, Josh Towers, Joe Inglett and Chacin a chance. Yes, they had their horrible years but they also had some very good seasons for us.

J.P's biggest impact has been bolstering the bullpen. Carlson came out of nowhere this year; Downs came out of no where to be a very good starter in 2006 and one of the best relievers in the game the past two years; Tallet and Wolfe have ben phenomenal too.

Now, we'll discuss some of J.P's more questionable moves. But thankfully, unlike some really bad GM's of years past (i.e. Cashman, New York Islanders' Mike Milbury, Sabean) there aren't too many given the number of years of J.P's reign.
Frank Thomas was an impulse buy and in very bad taste in retrospect. Especially considering we paid a very hefty sum for a season and change. Koskie was a bad contract for a team on a $50 mil budget but thankfully we got Tallet out of that mess.
In retrospect, letting Escobar and Delgado go were bad choices. Both had spent 10 years+ in the organization and we very willing to resign. Escobar wanted a 3 year $18 million deal and he turned out to pitch extremely well for that period but given the payroll and the enigmatic career of Escobar, it was a risk that would have been ill-advised.
Delgado's departure hurt the most because only one year later, Rogers announced $210 million for the next 3 years! Delgado was very willing to compromise for a deal in the $11-3 million range but I guess we're not sure who to blame here Rogers Inc. or Ricciardi/Godfrey.

But I think that given everything, J.P has been a good GM. I won't say excellent because we don't have a ring to show for it or a great signing/trade. Nevertheless, he's been good and has always put forward a team capable of winning around 80-85 games and with a little bit of luck could have pushed for 90 games and a wild card berth.

I think that as Jays fans, we have to really temper our expectations and understand that we're a mid-level team with hope but that there are plenty of such teams and so we can't do anything but sit on pins and hope for the best!

SK in NJ - Thursday, January 01 2009 @ 10:09 PM EST (#195354) #

I wanted the Jays to sign Bonds for 2008, and still think signing him (and dumping Thomas before his value predictably went in the crapper) may have been the difference between 86 and 90+ wins if he was healthy and "Bondsian", so I would have no problems having him at DH for 2009, perjury trial and all. This is what Moneyball was all about, right? Cheap Undervalued resource who no one else wants. I know I am in the minority, and JP would never do it, so I guess the point is moot.

TamRa - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 03:18 AM EST (#195355) #

Why do people presist in blaming the Bonds decision on JP as if he has a choice?

SK in NJ - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 08:50 AM EST (#195356) #

Why do people presist in blaming the Bonds decision on JP as if he has a choice?

Man, you really do have a thing for JP, don't you? I never blamed Ricciardi for not signing Bonds, nor was it even implied in my post. I said he'd never do it, much like every other GM it seems (I do believe it is collusion). The only GM I could have realistically seen doing it is Billy Beane, but if he didn't do it last year, then no one will. Doesn't mean it would be a bad move.

Not everything is a shot at Ricciardi.

John Northey - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 10:02 AM EST (#195357) #

When it comes to Bonds I would sign him, but can understand where the argument against is from. JP, based on interviews and past comments, seems like one of those who wouldn't sign him even if ownership allowed it.

JP has a strong anti-steroids/drug enhancement stance. He stated something along the lines that he wouldn't have signed Zaun had he known Zaun was a user way back when, then he didn't offer arbitration even though he would've gained a pick and odds were Zaun wouldn't accept. After it was rumoured Glaus used (info hit the media in late 07) he was traded. The odds of a guy with the commentary JP has stated and the actions he has shown would then go out and sign Barry Bonds, the poster boy for the drug era at the moment (rightly or wrongly, he is identified with it more than McGwire, Palmeiro, or Clemens) is pretty much 0% even if Bonds would've been very useful in 2008 and possibly useful in 2009.

ayjackson - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 10:07 AM EST (#195358) #

Just out of curiousity, what's the motive to collude against Barry Bonds? Doesn't he already hold baseball's storied record? I don't see what MLB has to gain.

jerjapan - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 10:30 AM EST (#195359) #

John, I think you nailed it in regards to JP signing Bonds - he's always stated he was a character guy, and for what it's worth, he seeks 'character' players. To me, character and effort go hand in hand, and personally, I think this approach makes more sense in a sport where effort more directly translates into wins (eg Basketball - look at the Raps 'efforts' rebounding and their win-loss record). Baseball is such a skilled sport that you can't just 'try harder' and hit / defend / pitch better. However, I have enjoyed watching the Jays play the last few years, there does seem to be some character and grit to them. Watching the Leafs this year vs last is similar ... this year's squad is much more entertaining, and I'd say it's due to effort and character.

Not to say Bonds doesn't try, or something abusrdly unscientific like that. It's just that I think JP has a stronger sense of his team's identity than some GMs, and that identity involves good people who play hard. Hard for me to say which I'd like more - an average team of good guys, or a contender with a notorious malcontent (not to suggest that Bonds would be such a difference-maker). I think after so many years of mediocrity I'd go with the contender, whereas if we were a perennial contender I'd value character first.

But I've never found Bonds to be worse than any other steriod users, and certainly not as noxious as some of the athletes guilty of other crimes. But he's an angry, outspoken black man who doesn't play by the rules, so who can be surprised that MLB hung him out to dry. Honestly, why else wouldn't a team sign him when countless lesser players who have been tainted by steriods have jobs, some in the same declining phase of their careers? Don't forget, the media attention paid to Bonds' potential indecscretions was far greater than say Greg Zaun - this may have, unintentionally or not, turned him into the scapegoat for the steroids scandal in the minds of many. Fair or not, this may explain why teams refuse to sign him while still employing Troy Glaus, for example.

John Northey - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 10:30 AM EST (#195360) #

I think the key with Bonds is that his contract ran out - as long as he was under contract with the Giants he had to keep playing, and once that ran out MLB felt it could finally remove him from the game along with giving the media the ability to stop writing about drugs and the like. No Bonds, no Sosa, no story they felt I suspect. Giambi had his TV moment asking forgiveness which let him off the hook more or less. No other big names who are connected to the 'steroid era' are still playing though. I also suspect Selig would love for Giambi to go away as well.

SK in NJ - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 10:50 AM EST (#195361) #

Just out of curiousity, what's the motive to collude against Barry Bonds? Doesn't he already hold baseball's storied record? I don't see what MLB has to gain.

Probably to avoid the headlines and distractions associated with having Bonds on a Major League team. I'm guessing baseball wants to completely disassociate with Bonds, Clemens, etc.

Personally, I don't agree with JP's "character" stance unless those character guys come with talent. Ultimately players like Bonds, Ramirez, etc, are the ones who put teams over the top. If JP signed Bonds tomorrow, 90% of baseball would hate it, but I would find it to be quite prudent. Hey, if you can't spend half a billion dollars to improve the team, why not sign someone for $1 million (or less) who could potentially give you .900+ OPS production over 100 games (assuming he's healthy and not taken away from legal issues)? It might even improve attendance and increase national TV exposure, in addition to adding a legit clean-up hitter. Having Cito around would help too since he's good at handling egos.

Again, it will never happen, but I'd love if it did, and I'm not a fan of Bonds (as a person) at all. I'd learn to root for a scumbag if he's helping the Jays win.

SheldonL - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 11:45 AM EST (#195362) #

Bonds flat-out would make this offence significantly better and I think that you should certainly value character players but talent must take priority!

Bonds would be excellent if he's still got his skills without steriods. I'd give him a very incentive-laden contract for 1 year with plate appearances and performance level guaranteeing a 2010 option. $7 million base salary;
after he's had 250 plate appearances:
$1 million for 20 homers and a million for 30, 40, 50....
$5 million for batting .300
$10 million if the Jays make the playoffs
a $10 million base salary with the same incentives for 2010 if Bonds hits 400 plate appearances with an OBP of .400

A Bonds acquisition would raise ticket sales, tv viewership, jerseys, and more importantly he would provide the hitters in front of him protection (hopefully 1 and 2 hitters Hill and Rios) and the hitters behind him (Wells, Lind) a guy on base to drive in. I think the latter would instantly improve our team offence more than a couple of notches.

John Northey - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 11:58 AM EST (#195363) #

Sheldon, the problem with that is A) Bonds has offered to play for the ML minimum with his salary going to charity and B) you cannot have incentives for anything like home runs, batting average, OBP, etc. only for games played and stuff like that.

I agree Bonds would sell tickets and get TV ratings but it is obvious MLB decided as a whole that it was time to push the steroid era into the past and, rightly or wrongly, Bonds is the poster boy for it. If the Jays wouldn't sign him when Stewart, then Mench, and WIlkerson were playing LF/DH then nothing will make them do it now with Snider/Lind sharing those two slots.

Ryan Day - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 12:26 PM EST (#195364) #

I don't buy the collusion argument for the simple reason that MLB hasn't been able to make anyone do anything. If Bud Selig can't stop the Yankees from spending a billion dollars every off-season, or stop teams from ignoring the recommended draft-slot bonuses, how's he going to stop anyone from signing Bonds? The Yankees do whatever they want; the Red Sox have lots of money and a smart GM; Tampa and Oakland will both pounce on undervalued reject players.

I don't think anyone wants to touch Bonds. He wasn't well-liked before, but now he's the guy who cheated and broke perhaps the most hallowed record in the game. And yes, there's a lot of hypocrisy in how teams treat players who break rules and laws, but Bonds is still pretty radioactive.

Chuck - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 12:36 PM EST (#195365) #

I don't buy the collusion argument for the simple reason that MLB hasn't been able to make anyone do anything.

Except engage in collusion.

TamRa - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 01:53 PM EST (#195366) #

Man, you really do have a thing for JP, don't you?

I have a thing for sound reasoning and quality argumentation. I'm funny like that.

I never blamed Ricciardi for not signing Bonds, nor was it even implied in my post. I said he'd never do it,

But you DIDN'T say NO ONE would ever do it and you DIDN'T say "He'd never be allowed to do it" - the clear implication is that he has the option. Perhaps you simply worded it in a sloppy fashion but it says what it says.

much like every other GM it seems (I do believe it is collusion). The only GM I could have realistically seen doing it is Billy Beane, but if he didn't do it last year, then no one will. Doesn't mean it would be a bad move.

Which was all REPEATEDLY and exaustively established all through last season as we watched one hapless DH performance after another. There is absolutely nothing new that can possibly be said on this subject now that hasn't been beaten to death, ressurected by the hand of god and beaten to death yet again.

Not everything is a shot at Ricciardi.

Consciously.

TamRa - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 02:15 PM EST (#195368) #

I do think a good argument can be made that Bonds offends JP's sensibilities - though one week before he told Wilner, essentially "hell no" he said something that seemed very open to the idea of Bonds (I won't try to recall the exact wording)

On the other hand, I think the Glaus/Zaun reasoning is very very flimsy. Not offering arbitration to Zaun as evidence of his distaste for steroids doesn't fly at all. For one thing, you aren't hurting Zaun at all, and for another, if you didn't want the dirty stinking steroid user on your team he would not have spent all of 2008 in uniform.

There's also a perfectly reasonable, logical, non-conspiritorial explaination, widely reported and confirmed by all parties, for the Glaus deal. Why is it necessary to assume neferious or hidden motives for it? To prop up an argument for JP not wanting to sign Bonds?

You can make that case just fine without brining Glaus and Zaun into it. If I were going to make the argument of "character over talent" that others are (rightfully) making here as part of JP's makeup....I'd start with the Adam Dunn business.

BTW, while on this subject (sorta) I'll digress to my soap box for a second. I sometimes wonder if I'm the only one out here who doesn't file all steroid use in the same catagory as "dirty stinking cheater"

IMO, there is a completely different character, tone, and ethic, between an All-star player like Bonds using regularly over the course of years in persuit of, essentially, self-absorbed glory at the expense of the competition and a guy clinging to the fringes of the majors who's trying to recover a bit quicker from an injury that may cost hm the chance to ever continue his career.

Where would Zaun be today if KC had cut him because of that injury and he'd have never lasted in the majors until he found his groove with the Blue Jays? One things for sure, in my mind, it's pretty understandable he'd have been desperate to avoid that circumstance back in 2000 or whenever it was.

Show me any player who used in an isolated incident for a short period of time specifically in an attempt to recover faster from injury and nothing more - and he gets a pass from me. that could be career saving, or it could be a natural (if misguided) obsession with getting back out there and helping your team that you feel like needs you.

That's not at all the same thing as using for years at a time to fundamentally redefine who you are as a ballplayer.

IMO.

I would hope that anyone running a ball team wouldn't be so narrow as to ignore that distinction. If JP is that's a knock against him in my book.

Ryan Day - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 02:34 PM EST (#195369) #

Except engage in collusion.

Of which nothing has been proven for about 20 years. "Alex Rodriguez should be making more money" isn't exactly a compelling argument.

92-93 - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 02:35 PM EST (#195370) #

"No other big names who are connected to the 'steroid era' are still playing though."

Jason Giambi, Brian Roberts, Andy Pettitte, Eric Gagne, and Miguel Tejada is nothing to sneeze at.

SK in NJ - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 02:43 PM EST (#195371) #

I have a thing for sound reasoning and quality argumentation. I'm funny like that.

I know what worship/blind faith is. You have it. And of all people, you decided JP Ricciardi was worthy of it. Oh well.

So you got your panties in a bunch because I said "JP wouldn't do it" instead of "no GM would do it"? Seriously? This is a Blue Jays forum. Ricciardi is the only one that matters in relation to Blue Jays transactions, which is why his name was used in isolation. What difference did that make to the actual point? Was it a factually incorrect statement on my part, no (JP has already said he wouldn't sign Bonds). So what's your beef? I flat out said that I feel there is collusion against Barry Bonds, on my different occasions, which completely contradicts what you felt I was implying. I don't need to mince my words just so Ricciardi's biggest fan doesn't get his feelings hurt.

Which was all REPEATEDLY and exaustively established all through last season as we watched one hapless DH performance after another. There is absolutely nothing new that can possibly be said on this subject now that hasn't been beaten to death, ressurected by the hand of god and beaten to death yet again.

And? Vernon Wells' contract has also been beaten to death (discussions which you have participated in on NUMEROUS websites including this one), as have many topics on this forum. That's the entire point of a discussion forum. Someone vaguely mentioned Barry Bonds in this thread. I put my 2 cents in. That's what this site is intended for.

You know what else has been beaten to death? Gord Ash's drafting vs. JP Ricciardi's drafting. Let's go back in time and see how many instances where that horse has been beaten (with you carrying the weapon). In fact you have initiated that discussion so many times I've lost count, so please spare me the "beaten to death" argument. Or give us Bauxites a list of what we can and cannot discuss. Maybe that will be more helpful.

Consciously.

You betcha.

subculture - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 02:51 PM EST (#195372) #

That may be true about JP - I always thought his treatment of Billy Koch the 2nd time around was curious... give him $1M, then cut him before camp breaks... he obviously was convinced that he was NOT going to get his velocity back... and Koch pretty much disappeared after that I believe (except for a story about some weird issues with cloth fragments coming out of his skin).

I think the vast majority of GM's now avoid suspected drug users, b/c you don't know how they'll perform without them. JP may have been ahead of his time on that one...

Re: Bonds - what numbers does he put up completely 'clean'? How does he react when he can't perform like he used to? Would I put it past him to find some new way to 'cheat' the system? No way in hell - I think he's one of those guys that can justify any action in his mind...

I'd much rather watch Snider struggle yet learn the game, instead of an aging vet decline ungracefully... (having said that, I think Alou is the exception who IS aging gracefully).

92-93 - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 03:02 PM EST (#195373) #

"When it comes to Bonds I would sign him, but can understand where the argument against is from. JP, based on interviews and past comments, seems like one of those who wouldn't sign him even if ownership allowed it."

John, I hate to keep jumping on what you say but...as Will pointed out, this simply isn't true. The week before he was adamant about not signing Bonds he more than left the door open to do just that. Here's what Wilner wrote after that session of Wednesdays with JP -

"Of course, there was lots of Barry Bonds talk. Maybe it�s me, but as the night wore on, I got the distinct impression that J.P. would like to have Bonds in the line-up, but that his bosses won�t go for it. He said things like:
�We�re still thinking about (signing Bonds) in the sense that we�re talking about a lot of things.�
�We would really have to do a lot of homework to make sure that it�s the right fit in a lot of ways.�
�We have to get a lot of sign-offs on a lot of things on this.�
�There�s a lot of things with this guy that this organization is not ready for in a lot of ways.�
To me, that doesn�t sound like a guy who has closed the door on the idea of signing the all-time home run king. He did say, though, that he doubted he�d be able to knock on Uncle Ted�s door to ask for more money with the team performing as poorly as it is right now, which is a bit of a Catch-22, and he also said �I really don�t see us going down the road there (pursuing Bonds).� Like I said, though, I got the distinct impression that HE wants to, at least, and he didn�t argue with me when I suggested that even if Bonds is here and on his own program, The Barry-style, the guys on the team wouldn�t care so long as he was helping them win."

TamRa - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 03:39 PM EST (#195375) #

I used to post on Fanhome/Scout many years ago when you, as a moderator, resigned from that spot ONLY so you could verbally abuse posters who were against JP Ricciardi (this included personal insults and excessive cursing). Unless your above statement was intended to be a joke, it's flat out incorrect based on your history.

I felt then and feel now that I was being baited because my position kept me from speaking freely. I also find it very funny how selective memories love to cite insults FROM me (pretty much entierly confined to contempt for weak arguments even then) and not insults directed TO me. The cursing, some of which I regret, had to do with larger issues in my life and - if you'd seen me posting elsewhere you'd know - had pretty much nothing to do with passion for JP.

that said, the first two or three years I WAS a pretty intense fan of his based on the reputation he came in with and i thought (and still think) others were too quick to hate based on isolated moves the disagreed with (for an example, I hated the Lopez deal but I didn't decide he was a moron based on that deal)
That reality has exactly nothing to do with how I fell about him NOW - or do you dismiss the possibility a persons opinion can modify over 4 or 5 years?

I know what worship/blind faith is. You have it.

Based on your history/comments, apparently you don't.

So you got your panties in a bunch because I said "JP wouldn't do it" instead of "no GM would do it"?

What makes you think "my panties were in a bunch"? I asked a simple question - and I didn't say "you" I said "people" because it's a pretty common occurance. Funny how it's MY panties in a bunch but its YOU who launched into a long winded "I can't believe you're in love with JP" speil over a one sentence question.

I don't need to mince my words just so Ricciardi's biggest fan doesn't get his feelings hurt.

Can't recall asking you to, and my feelings have never ever been hurt by what was said about someone other than myself. But you are welcome to think it does if it makes you feel more special.

And? Vernon Wells' contract has also been beaten to death (discussions which you have participated in on NUMEROUS websites including this one), as have many topics on this forum

Because there's a difference of opinion on that. As far as i can tell, pretty much the whole Jays universe agrees Bonds would have made a huge difference and that the Jays would never ever sign him regardless of that. Where is the debate? If there is no disagreement then it's just impotent whining.

You know what else has been beaten to death? Gord Ash's drafting vs. JP Ricciardi's drafting.

Again, there is disagreement. Perhaps you are not entirely up on the difference between debated" and "grumbling"

Let's go back in time and see

Yes, by all means let's further currupt this thread by rehashing stuuff that's happened months or years ago, and citing old grudges from boards that don't even exist anymore, and by saying "you always" like some old married couple fighting over we left the toliet seat up in 2001.

Lets do that. I'm sure everyone else here will throughly enjoy it.

Or...maybe not.

Maybe that will be more helpful.

What would be more helpful would be if you'd leave your personal grudges at the door and talk baseball.
I will speak no more of these things.

If you want to defeat the proposition that JP is a good or bad or mediocre or miserable or great GM, then speak of JP and can the implications about "hero worship" and the like. If you have a good case you can make it without such nonsense.

Every time you resort to it - all it implies is that you can't carry on the debate on it's merits.

In any case, this community is FAR too high-quality to tolerate this sort crap and, if I were running it (and not me ;) lol) I'd delete both your posts and mine on this useless squabbling.

Good day sir.

Jimbag - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 04:20 PM EST (#195376) #

Will, SK - you're both pretty. Now just let go of each other's hair and lets get back to baseball. Happy new year to you both.

John Northey - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 04:58 PM EST (#195377) #

When it comes to steroids/HGH/whatever and JP I was speaking from what I recalled. I didn't recall JP talking about 'maybe' signing Bonds but needing 1,000,000 sign offs for it. As to the bit with Zaun and Glaus - those were more the only really known drug users that we know exactly what JP did with, namely trading or (basically) releasing them as soon as he could without writing off millions of dollars. Were there other issues in both cases? Yup. However, when the only two guys on the team with any drug suspicions around them are gone fairly quickly (Zaun might have had no trade value for all we know) it does look like a bit of 'smoke' from the 'fire' so to speak.

JP is an ex player and odds are any ex-players who didn't use steroids/HGH/etc. would be a bit bitter about guys who do. Plus, of course, any GM with any sense would try to clear out those guys as better and better tests emerge knowing that these guys could end up being gone for a big chunk of a season or could collapse in performance if they cannot access said drugs anymore (some think they wouldn't collapse, and Giambi is a good test case).

jerjapan - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 05:46 PM EST (#195378) #

I sometimes wonder if I'm the only one out here who doesn't file all steroid use in the same catagory as "dirty stinking cheater"

IMO, there is a completely different character, tone, and ethic, between an All-star player like Bonds using regularly over the course of years in persuit of, essentially, self-absorbed glory at the expense of the competition and a guy clinging to the fringes of the majors who's trying to recover a bit quicker from an injury that may cost hm the chance to ever continue his career.

I agree completely Will. I admire people with the moral certitude to declare that steroids are wrong across the board - as long as they themselves lead exemplary lives. I draw the same distinction you do between career stars trying to break records and fringe major leaguers trying to make a living. What irks me so much about the Bonds coverage was that some of those pillorying Bonds for his low character were shock jock radio scumbags jumping on the bash-Bonds bandwagon.

TamRa - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 08:28 PM EST (#195379) #

Will, SK - you're both pretty. Now just let go of each other's hair and lets get back to baseball. Happy new year to you both.

Yes but do you think this color works on me?

;)

Mick Doherty - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 08:52 PM EST (#195380) #

I'd delete both your posts and mine on this useless squabbling.

Honestly, I was thisclose to doing just that as I read through this thread, as rare is the conflict on this site that steeps from disagreement into pettiness as this one did (on both sides).

But sometimes you show the team the video of Ruben Rivera running the bases, instead of destroying the tape, so you can say "Guys -- that there, don't do that."

So I won't even "unfeature" the comments. Too much effort for too little return. But Bauxites, you've read the thread. So -- that there? Don't do that.

SK in NJ - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 09:32 PM EST (#195381) #

Will, SK - you're both pretty. Now just let go of each other's hair and lets get back to baseball. Happy new year to you both.

It's nothing personal, just me being surprised that Will is still running the same posting style on another message board (though he hasn't had a nervous breakdown here yet). He has a long history of acting up on many different forums, especially when someone knocks Ricciardi (proven in this case as I wasn't even bashing JP and Will came to his defense anyway), so maybe it was a mix of confusion and surprise on my part that he hasn't changed a bit. Like a turd, he just seems to spring back up from the toilet bowl on every site I read. This site is probably the only one he hasn't been kicked out of, so if nothing else, I am letting the public know in advance about this particular poster's behavior. With that said, for the sake of this forum, I will just ignore him to avoid this type of stuff in the future, although it did help me kill a few minutes at work, which was a bonus.

On another note, I prefer "ruggedly handsome" over "pretty". For future reference.

ayjackson - Friday, January 02 2009 @ 11:24 PM EST (#195382) #

So SK in NJ has Mick on "ignore".

timpinder - Saturday, January 03 2009 @ 02:11 AM EST (#195383) #

I didn't read any of the comments because I've learned to ignore the lengthy posts that actually require me to scoll down in order to see them in their entirety.

TamRa - Saturday, January 03 2009 @ 03:03 AM EST (#195384) #

So I won't even "unfeature" the comments. Too much effort for too little return. But Bauxites, you've read the thread. So -- that there? Don't do that.

For whatever it's worth, i DO value the high tone here and I SERIOUSLY regret the ...um...stuff. My unfortunate predelection to self defense even when the claims are unworthy needs to be tamed.

Be that as I may, I sincerely apologize to you and to the rest of the community for my part. Not that i feel i wronged SK - but I clearly gave ammunition to something that should have been best let die. i do regret it.

The_Game - Saturday, January 03 2009 @ 06:01 AM EST (#195385) #

I vividly recall that Wednesday with JP, 92-93. As you might remember, I had wanted to sign Bonds all season long (even when Frank Thomas was still on the roster), so I was excited to hear that the Jays were atleast considering picking up the greatest hitter of our generation. Of course, those hopes all came crashing down only a week later (Godfrey must have said no). In restrospect, it was not having a good LF/DH that cost this team the playoffs last season. The fact that he left guys like Shannon Stewart and Brad Wilkerson on the roster for so long was incredibly frustrating. Even a league average player at one of those positions would have contributed in a major way.

SheldonL - Saturday, January 03 2009 @ 01:58 PM EST (#195386) #

You know what, The_Game, I would argue that a blackhole at LF and SS cost us the playoffs. The Angels and the Rays made the playoffs magically despite offenses very similar to ours. The addition of Bonds would have drastically impacted the rest of the roster. Perhaps a guy like Overbay would have been placed ahead of Bonds in the order and would have snapped out of his season long funk. Or a guy like Rios placed in front of Bonds would have heated up sooner than mid-July.

zeppelinkm - Sunday, January 04 2009 @ 09:09 PM EST (#195388) #

In 2008, David Eckstein posted a 91 OPS+ and played 56 games at SS. Scutaro played another 50 odd games and posted an OPS+ of 86. Matt Stairs was the teams main DH and in his time as DH he posted a .243/.350/.382 (82 games) or a seasonal line of 96 OPS+ (however he did much better in his time in the OF and as a PH so his OPS+ as DH is worse then that).

Production out of LF and DH is definitely what destroyed the teams offence last season. If Adam Lind and Travis Snider can together as a pair be average to anywheres above it and everyone else remained exactly the same, the team would have a significantly better offence. 22% of your offence is significant, especially in a "keep the line moving" style environment (which is what a baseball offence is).

Call Up The Reserves | 51 comments | Create New Account

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