Batter's Box Interactive Magazine

Got to thinking - what should we expect in the Jays rotation and bullpen in 2009? We have been assuming Cito will go with a 7 man bullpen but will he push for a 6 man?

In September, when Cito had tons of options and knew who he had, the pen usage was...
Carlson: 13 - 13.1 IP
Tallet: 10 - 12.1 IP
Ryan: 10 - 10 IP
League: 8 - 7 IP
Downs: 7 - 7 IP
Parrish: 4 - 6.1 IP plus 1 start for 5 IP.
Frasor: 4 - 3.1 IP
Wolfe: 3 - 4.0 IP
Camp: 3 - 1.1 IP

So 5 guys received regular work while 4 guys were mop up guys from the looks of it. The 4 mop up's threw 15 innings total in September with 5 2/3's of that being in one game where Marcum left after just 2 IP and 3 more IP in a game Richmond started and went 5 IP - so over half their innings were in 2 games. Could a 6 man pen work for Cito? I suspect he'd like to go for it.

What about the starters? Lets check starts, IP/Start for September.
Litsch: 6 - 6.9 IP
Halladay: 5 - 7 IP
AJ: 5 - 6.9 IP
Purcey: 4 - 5.7 IP
Marcum: 3 - 5.4 IP (including a 2 IP outting removed the other 2 averaged 7.2 IP)
Richmond: 2 - 5.5 IP
Parish: 1 - 5 IP (plus 4 in relief for 6.1 IP)

Clear pattern of pushing the vet's (Litsch/Halladay/AJ/Marcum) for 7 innings while the guys who weren't here all year were asked for 5-6 (Purcey, Richmond, Parrish). In 2007 in September AJ and Halladay were pushed harded though, while Litsch/Marcum were pushed a lot less and McGowan was at 6.7. Hmmm. Not sure if we have a strong pattern for Cito vs Gibbons here. Still, given past history I'd have to think Cito wants 7 innings per start from his starters if possible. Again, helping push the 6 man pen vs a 7 man.

Still, the best way is to check how often he used that full pen.
Relievers Used: Frequency
0: 8 (complete game)
1: 16
2: 20
3: 25
4: 14
5: 3
6: 1 (full pen used)
7: 0
8: 1 (September - Marcum going 2 IP)

Now for 2007...
Relievers Used: Frequency
0: 11 (complete game)
1: 21
2: 45
3: 50
4: 22
5: 9
6: 2 (full pen used)
7: 2 (both September)

Double Cito's number for a rough comparison (he managed for 88 games). Strangely enough it almost dead on matches Gibbons in 2007. Huh. Caught me off guard and kind of kills my belief that Cito wants to go with a 6 man pen. Did he do that in September too? Adjusting September usage to 162 games...
Relievers Used: Frequency
0: 19
1: 37
2: 37
3: 31
4: 25
5: 6
...
8: 6

Hmmm.... down to a max of 4 with just 2 times that he went above that number. Still, adjust to 162 and it works out to a similar ratio to Gibbons usage. Is it due to a desire to get everyone in or is it a desire to use that many pitchers? No matter how I cut it we are getting the same end result - Cito using the pen in a similar fashion to Gibbons.

What about his use of the 14th hitter vs #7 reliever in September? This is a Frasor vs Mench (or Wilkerson) depending on Games or PA's (Frasor faced 20 batters in 3 1/3 IP vs Wolfe's 14 in 4 IP). Frasor's 4 games vs Mench's 9 or Frasor's 20 batters faced vs Wilkerson's 13 PA's. This suggests the 14th hitter was used in more games but for fewer PA's in those games than the 7th reliever (which makes sense). Frasor's 4 appearances came when the score was tied (12th inning), Jays down by 5 (7th inning), down by 7 (8th inning), and down by 2 in the 9th. Just one high leverage and that was extra innings. What about Mench's 9 games? 6 were starts so right away he was in higher impact situations than Frasor, the 3 others were a pinch running situation (6th inning, up by 2), a defensive replacement in the 8th inning Jays up by 7, pinch hitting in the 8th of a game the Jays were up by 8 at the time. Wilkerson (the other 14th man) had 2 starts, 4 pinch running, 4 defensive replacements and a pinch hitting assignment. 5 of those games he came in part way through were decided by 2 runs or less. To be fair, Wolfe was used 3 times - Jays up by 1, down by 2 and down by 3 while Camp was used when the Jays were tied (extra innings), down by 2 and down by 1. Thus the 7th and beyond relievers were only used when the Jays were up once and twice when tied (extra innings).

So what does this all tell us? When he had a 14th man Cito used him in far more high pressure situations than he used his 7th reliever. The 7th man was pretty much saved for extra inning or 'give the pen a day off' stuff. The 14th hitter was used as a spot starter, pinch runner for tight situations and defensive replacement as well. I suspect Cito will push for that 6 man pen with the 6th man being sent down when the pen is tired to get a fresh arm up. The extra guy off the bench will be a fast runner with solid defense to cover in LF, or a slugger to mix into LF/1B/DH - ideally with more speed than Overbay/Barajas/Barrett.

Posted by John Northey on Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 10:25 AM EST.

Cito's Pitching Use | 80 comments | Create New Account

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

jerjapan - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 01:11 PM EST (#196305) #

A fourtheenth position player would absolutely be of more use to this team than a 7th man in the pen, uncertainty surrounding the rotation notwithstanding. Proper usage of the AAA / big league shuttle would allow the team to rest tired arms (the demoted players wouldn't even need to make the trip, would they? Just take three days off and then demote the minor leagurer?) - although this certainly hasn't been the Jays MO when their triple A team was nearby. Riccardi seems to be a 7 man pen guy, but Cito might just have the managerial gravitas and the old-school mentality to get back down to six, and with our potential weaknesses on offense, this makes tons of sense to me.

So who should be the 14th player - Jason Lane? I think it would have to be an outfielder - Bautista, McDonald and Inglett all deserve infield reserve jobs and with Lind as DH, we he have no outfield reserve whatsoever (Inglett would be the guy I guess).

Pistol - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 01:37 PM EST (#196309) #

What was Cito like the first time around managing? Did he use 6 pitchers then?

6 relievers always sounds like a good idea, but it never seems to come into play (at least with the Jays). If a starter gets shelled two days in a row you get tired arms pretty quick.

With so many non-star players you'd think an extra platoon and/or pinch hitting option would be useful.

Craig B - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 01:57 PM EST (#196311) #

By 1994, Cito (or rather Cito and Gillick; these decisions are always made in partnerships) was using 14 position players and 11 pitchers on a regular basis. This was the standard regular-season roster construction at the time. His playoff rosters appear in 1992 and 1993 appear to have employed 10 pitchers and 15 position players, again a standard construction for the era, but I can't confirm that as I am only looking at Retrosheet rosters.

A cursory review indicates that Cito usually had 14 position players and 11 pitchers back to 1990.

Glevin - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 02:35 PM EST (#196314) #

Early in the season, there is absolutely no reason to carry a seventh reliever as there are so many off days that the fifth started can pitch out of the pen. Cito likes to use the same guys a lot, so even during the season, I don't see any reason to have a seventh reliever.

Richard S.S. - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 02:39 PM EST (#196316) #

It is all a matter of how confident Cito is with his starters. In the '92 ALCS and W.S. and the '93 ALCS and W.S., Cito carried 10 Pitchers. At the start of the '92 season he used 9 pitchers out of maybe a 10 or 11-man Staff. At the start of the '93 season he used mostly 9 pitchers of maybe a 10 or 11-man Staff. At times during the season, 12 pitchers were carried. In the '89 ALCS and '91 ALCS he carried 10 pitchers. At the start of the '90 and '91 season, 12 pitchers were carried. (This is from my personal records of the team kept 1987 to 1993. Beware!!!! 100% accuracy I can't guarantee.) The other factor is how good is his bullpen. After all, Cito had the Ward and Henke magic working. He will go with 11 unless he's impressed with his bench, then 12. The more interesting question is who is the next Duane Ward and Tom Henke on this team?

Mylegacy - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 03:02 PM EST (#196318) #

OK...

In 08 Roy started 33, in 09 33. Litsch started 28 in 08, in 09 34 (the 6 extra are Parrish's 6 starts in 08), McGowan started 19 in 08 as he will in 09 when he comes back in late May or June. Purcey started 12 in 08 and will start 12 in 09 as well (see next paragraph). Richmond started 5 in 08 and will start 5 in 09 (see next paragraph).

AJ started 34 in 08 and Marcum started 25 in 08 that gives us 59 starts to replace in 09. Those starts will be split BETWEEN: Purcey who could reasonably start 20 (in addition to the 12 I've already pencilled him in for), Janssen may start up to 20, Clement may start up to 20, Richmond may start up to 20 (in addition to the 5 I've already pencilled him in for), Cecil could start 20. That means for the 59 starts we NEED we have 100 possible starts available to us.

BECAUSE we'll be auditioning for at least 59 starts we'll NEED a full 7 man bullpen. I suggest: Ryan, Downs, League, Accardo, Carlson, Tallet with either Frasor and his "new pitch" or Camp. IF Cecil - Richmond and - Clement come forward then Janssen would FORCE his way into the pen.

Are you SURE it's not April yet!

Gerry - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 03:47 PM EST (#196320) #

I heard JP on the Fan yesterday and he said that the bullpen might be needed more this season if the starters dont go as long, I can't remember the particular point that made him say that but I did recall that point.

Also the Jays have yet another pitcher on the 40 man roster, Matt Bush, former #1 pick of the Padres. Dirk Hayhurst is the unlucky pitcher to get removed, the third removal from the 40 man this week.

The Jays still have Shaun Marcum and Dustin McGowan on the 40-man, I assume they can't get moved to the 60 day DL until closer to the start of the season.

Mike Green - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 04:20 PM EST (#196321) #

If the pen is going to be used more, it would be nice if the middle relief comes in 1-3 inning outings every few days rather than the serial use and re-use to gain platoon advantages. Scheduled use would be even better.

The team's IP/relief outing did go up to noticeably over 1.0 after Cito took over last year. If it makes it to 1.3-1.4, that would be a very good sign.

Mylegacy - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 04:25 PM EST (#196322) #

What follows is OFF-TOPIC. I apologize in advance, it seems like I've got ADD (Attention Deficit Disorder) - my mind - such as it is - is full of baseball this time of year and is in overdrive.

Therefore without further ado - Ladies and Gentlemen, by September 2011, your Blue Jays position players:

Catchers: Jon Talley L/R 6' 4" 220, JP Arencibia R/R 6' 1" 215.
Left Field: Travis Snider L/L 5' 11' 245.
Center Field: Alexis Rios R/R 6' 5" 215.
Right Field: Vernon Vells R/R 6' 1" 235 OR Eric Thames L/R 6' 1" 205.
Third Base: Balbino Fuenmayor R/R 6' 3" 200 OR Kevin Ahrens B/R 6' 1" 210.
Short Stop: Justin Jackson R/R 6' 2" 200 OR Tyler Pastornicky R/R 5' 11" 180.
Second Base: Aaron Hill R/R 5' 11" 205 OR Scott Campbell L/R 6' 205 OR Brad Emaus R/R 5' 11" 205.
First Base: David Cooper L/L 6' 185
DH: Adam Loewen L/L 6' 5" 245.

Man - that group has me goose pimply all over!

Mike Green - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 04:40 PM EST (#196323) #

Thames apparently has a weak arm, and would more likely end up in LF.

John Northey - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 04:50 PM EST (#196324) #

Well, hopefully Hayhurst will either get a shot with the Jays AAA team (off 40 man doesn't mean released) or someone gives him a ML shot. For his sake another team would be better as our pen is crazy deep.

Bush is shifting from SS (660 OPS highest he got) to P (16 K in 7 2/3 IP during his one shot pre-surgery). Meanwhile Adam Loewen is shifting from P to 1B/DH/OF. Interesting pair to have in the system. Glad to see the Jays being creative with their signings.

As to the pen being used - I think spring will tell the tale there. Halladay and Litsch will eat their share of innings. Purcey had 182 IP last year so he should be ready for a full workload. Richmond had 166 IP so again he should be able to take whatever the Jays give him. The #5 hole is the big question imo - guys like Wolfe & Janssen shifting from relief to starting, or guys rehabbing like Clement & McGowan will need help to get through. Kids like Cecil would be handled with kid gloves if given a shot. Having Halladay in the rotation helps a lot as he'll give the pen 5-9 days off during the season and probably all but one or two another 23-25 days off. Purcey is the big key imo - if he stays focused we'll have another 6-7 IP per game starter rather than a 5-6 IP. McGowan coming back strong would also be a big help. Using the relievers for over an IP per game would be a big help too. Watch the spring and see how these guys arms get stretched out and we'll know what to expect. We will probably have a 7 man pen to start but don't be surprised to see a 6 man by mid-season.

greenfrog - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 05:07 PM EST (#196325) #

Not sure about Loewen's defensive skills, but I could see him at 1B and Cooper at DH. I think Jackson is really important for the Jays going forward. SS is one of the hardest positions to fill (as evidenced for most of the Ricciardi regime). Having a productive SS would help solidify the team. 3B is another key position. The Jays have a few interesting players (Fuenmayor, Ahrens, Emaus) but the jury is still out on all of them. Catching is another question mark. Despite the Jays' minor-league depth at the position, it's been a long time since the farm produced a frontline catcher, and Arencibia still has skeptics.

I wonder whether Lind will be on the team in a couple of years. 2009 is a big year for him.

timpinder - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 06:33 PM EST (#196327) #

I read that Fuenmayor was to move from 3B to 1B this year. I'm excited about Jackson, but he's a long way away. Even if a player like Jackson ends up being a superstar he'd only "solidify" the Jays' shortstop position for a few years until he became too expensive (likely just before entering his prime), unless the Jays' recent decrease in salary is only a blip. As for Lind, it is a big year for him, but I'd like to see what he can do as a full time position player. In 2008 his numbers as a DH were considerably worse than in numbers were when he was playing in LF.

The position players look like they could be pretty good in 2011. The pitching leaves much to be desired, however. Halladay will be in decline and McGowan has a pretty bad injury history already. If everything works out perfectly then Cecil and Ricky Romero have #2 starter stuff, but I just don't see anybody in the system with the stuff to replace Halladay as the team ace. It's time the Jays start drafting highschool arms again, unless they have such a bad year that they get one of the first picks and can snag a guy like Price.

Mylegacy - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 06:39 PM EST (#196328) #

JOHN, I agree with your Purcey comment. Several sites still list Purcey as a potential front of the rotation guy. Personally, I think there is at least a 50/50 chance he's at least a McGowan. If he was - those two plus Roy and Cecil look like a great 1 through 4 with Marcum and Litsch trying ot hold off Mills for 5th.

GREENFROG, I think most abservers now think JP will be a "average" at WORSE defensive catcher in the bigs. Offensively, he looks like a whole lot of everything or nothing - BUT a guy that catch and hit 20 + homers is not to be sneezed at. However - I've got my money on Jon Talley - I think this guy may be the "real deal"!

On the Balbino - at 18 in 08 he hit 307/360/458. The "jury" ain't still out. This kid is also the "real deal."

On Lind - he turns 25 this year he CRUSHED pitching all through the minors - I would not be surprised if he actually exploded this year. He's got my vote for "sleeper" of 09.

Dave Till - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 06:40 PM EST (#196329) #

Cito tended to work his top relievers ridiculously hard, and to work relievers in stretches that we would find highly unusual today. On 6/22/90 against the Yankees, to pull one example out of a hat, Cito pitched *three* pitchers in a 15-inning game. Key started and went six, Frank Wills threw four more, and then Willie Blair threw the last five innings and unsurprisingly lost the game in the 15th giving up two runs after the bases had been empty and two were out.

I looked this game up (I heart Baseball Reference). The Jays were down 5-1 after six; Jimmy Key got beaten up, and Wills came in to mop up, allowing one more run to make it 6-1 before the Jays tied it with five runs in the bottom of the 8th.

Normally, this would be a job for Duane Ward, but Ward had been struggling; he had lost the game on the 19th and had given up three hits (including a long home run to Matt Nokes) in an outing on the 21st. Wills was pitching well, so Cito left him in there.

Blair's long outing was because he had been used as a spot starter that year. His last appearance had been 6 1/3 innings in a start on the 16th. He pitched well in his five innings of relief on the 22nd. In fact, the two runs he gave up in the 15th inning were unearned - Nelson Liriano booted a ground ball on what would have been the third out.

As for Cito's relief patterns in general: I always got the impression that he picked one guy to handle save situations in the 9th, a guy to set up the closer, and then used everybody else as necessary to fill in when the starters got tired or were ineffective. I'd have to look it up to confirm this - more time on Baseball Reference may be called for! - but I recall that, this year, Ryan pitched the 9th and Downs pitched the 8th. I also recall that Cito didn't like doing mid-inning switches to get the platoon advantage. I should check whether I'm right, though that would involve overcoming my innate tendency to be slothful :-)

Pistol - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 06:55 PM EST (#196332) #

The Jays traded for Matt Bush.

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090210&content_id=3814766&vkey=hotstove2008&fext=.jsp

Wildrose - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 07:25 PM EST (#196333) #

Apparently Bush was having off-field problems which led to his release from the Padres,

The reporter further alleges that the former star athlete at San Diego�s Mission Bay High yelled ��I'm Matt [expletive] Bush!� and �[expletive] East County!� before getting in his car and running over a curb while leaving the campus.

He's also recovering from T.J. surgery.

I guess ( in jest) , that recovering T.J. pitchers, who've recently been moved into pitching from the field , and who apparently have drinking problems, have become the new "market inefficiency" in todays economic ravaged times. I'm not a big fan of East County either.

TamRa - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 08:13 PM EST (#196335) #

A fourtheenth position player would absolutely be of more use to this team than a 7th man in the pen, uncertainty surrounding the rotation notwithstanding.

I agree with the principle, but there's not, in my view, a worthy candidate in-house. Unless we treat Barrett as a platoon DH/1B/3B and Chavez as the reserve catcher, which seems a waste of a spot if Bautista stays...It presents the opportunity to go back to the Well on a cheap guy who's still out there (I'd still sign Alou as the full time DH and send Snider to AAA to start the year if I had my way) such as Garret Anderson.

Short of a signing, I'd as soon have a quality pitcher as a Wilkerson clone on the bench for Cito to fall in love with.

So who should be the 14th player - Jason Lane?

My guess is IF the Jays did so and IF he does come to camp, Millar would be the guy who had the edge.

Early in the season, there is absolutely no reason to carry a seventh reliever as there are so many off days that the fifth started can pitch out of the pen.

The fifth starter seldom pitches in relief - the off-days help because the pen get's a guaranteed day's rest.

However, in 2009, the Jays only have 2 off days before may 28 so even that general assumption doesn't work this season.

SS is one of the hardest positions to fill (as evidenced for most of the Ricciardi regime). Having a productive SS would help solidify the team.

off topic but I have a hypothesis that next off season the Jays will deal a very good pitcher for a good young shortstop if one can be found availalble. I would not be at all surprised to see even mcGowan dealt in the right deal because there's no way we can use all the SP we will have ready in 2010.

I read that Fuenmayor was to move from 3B to 1B this year.

That might have come from me. JP stated that specifically on WWJP late in the season, not sure on what the date was. That disappointed me to hear, but he didn't say it in uncertain terms like "We might" or "we're looking at" - he wais "we will"

For whatever that's worth.

The position players look like they could be pretty good in 2011. The pitching leaves much to be desired

How ya figure? This?

Halladay will be in decline and McGowan has a pretty bad injury history already. If everything works out perfectly then Cecil and Ricky Romero have #2 starter stuff, but I just don't see anybody in the system with the stuff to replace Halladay as the team ace

We've been spoiled, my friend, most teams don't have anyone like Halladay. Winning teams have a good #1, to be sure, but there's no Doc most of the time. look at the Angels over the last few years and ask - ddo we have a potential John Lackey? That would be a better question.

CAN we assume that Doc (assuming he's still here) will be "in decline"?
Maddux didn't decline until 37
Johnson didn't decline until 41
Schilling had his best years at age 34-36
Going back a few years, Carlton had a couple of his best years at 35 and 36; Blyleven was at the top of his game at 33,34

The numbers suggest a potential decilen, but elite pitchers seem less likely to decline and Doc is certainly an exceptional case. I don't think it's a given he will be "in decline"

Beyond that, we have McGowan, Marcum, Janssen, Purcey, Pistch, Cecil, Romero, Mills, Rzepsinki all in the mix and we can afford for fully half of those to dissapoint and still have a solid rotation.

Is it better to have an "ace" who can bust 150 in ERA+, or is it better to have so much depth that even your #5 is over 120?

scottt - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 08:40 PM EST (#196338) #

Next to Matt Bush the Ricky Romero pick doesn't look that bad.

Unless they make some trades, I expect Cito to play the best team he can field and that pretty much means a 7-men bullpen.

Litsch barely averaged 6 innings per game last year. McGowan and Janssen are coming off injuries. Just getting 5 good innings from the 5th starter would be great.

ayjackson - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 08:54 PM EST (#196339) #

I would have said Marcum and McGowan both have "ace" potential. Midseason, some scouts were beginning to compare Marcum to Maddux. However, his future is up in the air. Control is key from him, and I don't like his chances of regaining his control in 2010 - his first year back from TJ. The good news is his arb years won't be so expensive.

McGowan is another story. When healthy, he can be our ace. He's already had TJ, a torn rotator cuff and a frayed-labrum. Maybe he should switch arms.

timpinder - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 09:24 PM EST (#196341) #

McGowan still has the frayed labrum, doesn't he? If I remember correctly they thought of sewing it up when they were in there but opted to just repair the torn rotator cuff, since the frayed labrum hadn't worsened. Either way, when I think of the Jays' future rotation I don't see McGowan being a regular part of it. If League or Accardo don't show enough to step into the closer role after Ryan departs, McGowan might be an option. I just don't have faith in McGowan pitching 200 innings a season consistently with his injury history.

ayjackson - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 09:47 PM EST (#196342) #

Ryan, Accardo, Downs, Carlson and League is a pretty nasty pen. All late innings guys too. Tallet can fill that long relief role and so can Wolfe, I'm not sure where Frasor fits in. The long relief role looks more important this year, with only Doc being a certain innings eater in the rotation.

I'd actually prefer the trade Tallet for something and move one of the Romero's into the long relief role.

The other noteworthy item is that I'm not sure any of the relievers have options left, with the possible exception of Carlson. And I don't think Carlson is going to see AAA out of the gate.

greenfrog - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 10:01 PM EST (#196343) #

"do we have a potential John Lackey? That would be a better question."

The front of the Angels' rotation consists of Santana, Lackey, Weaver, Saunders, and Garland--arguably in that order. Last year, in his age-25 season, Santana threw 219 innings of 127+ ERA ball (Halladay's career ERA+ is 131). So the Angels really have two aces. Maybe three, if Weaver can put it all together. Even Saunders had a very nice 2008. Now a healthy front four that consists of Halladay, McGowan, Marcum, Litsch is still very respectable. But "healthy" is the key word.

Mylegacy: I don't know anything about Talley, but let's see...during the 2008 season, in 140 Gulf Coast League ABs, he hit 300/348/493 (nice) but his BB:K ratio was 9:48 (hmm). Prorated, that's 36 BB and 192 Ks in a 560 AB season. Which is fine if you're Ryan Howard or maybe Adam Dunn. Well, Talley is just starting out, so he's got lots of time. Have you heard anything about his defensive skills?

greenfrog - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 10:18 PM EST (#196344) #

'On the Balbino - at 18 in 08 he hit 307/360/458. The "jury" ain't still out. This kid is also the "real deal."'

Fuenmayor had a nice season, especially for an 18-year-old. But I think the jury will be out on him (as it is for most prospects) until he successfully makes the leap to high-A, double-A, etc. Hitting 307/360/458 in the GCL is a good start, but it is the GCL. When Russ Adams made his debut in the NYPL in 2002, he hit 354/464/469 (933 OPS) in 30 games, but he ended up with a career OPS of 755 in the minors. I don't mean to be pessimistic. I prefer "hopeful but realistic..."

SheldonL - Tuesday, February 10 2009 @ 10:39 PM EST (#196345) #

Cito Gaston took over on June 21st and since then he's used relievers as follows:

Carlson - 39.2 IP in 38 appearances
Downs - 38.1 IP in 34 appearances
Ryan - 34IP in 34 appearances
League - 30 IP in 29 appearances
Tallet - 25.1 IP in 22 appearances
Frasor - 24 IP in 23 appearances
Camp - 20.2 IP in 19 appearances
Wolfe - 7.1 IP in 6 appearances (missed time in from mid-July and August because of injuries/half-conversion into a starter in minors)

So it looks like the top 5 are locks. I think Frasor makes the team too no doubt but his contract seems to indicate he might be dealt. I Accardo makes this team as a no doubter too so it looks like Camp is the odd man out.

btw, Jon Garland is no longer an Angel, he signed with the D-Backs.

I'd also like to do a plug for my ultra competitive fantasy baseball league.
It's with Yahoo...

baseball.fantasysports.yahoo.com

League # : 26901

and the password is

torre

It's going to be really fun and intense since it's a 20 team league!

TamRa - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 12:21 AM EST (#196347) #

Sheldon, in an old thread you said you'd be interested in my thoughts on "what I'd do as the GM"

If you really wantto know, look here:

http://mvn.com/thesouthpaw/2009/02/10/what-id-doright-now.html

(Sorry for the public nature of this everyone, not spamming for attention - just don't seem to have any luck with private messages her for some reason)

SheldonL - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 01:03 AM EST (#196349) #

WillRain, I liked that plan a lot. It's very realistic in that you're going forward with what is the best bullpen possible. I'm assuming that guys like Shawn Camp and Wolfe were dealt for PTBNL's which is fine because it's a forced decision. I also liked the pecking order of the 5th starter role. I that if Clement does pitch and pitch well, these 2009 Blue Jays have a fighting chance.

I also liked the idea of releasing Bautista and recouping some of his salary to sign Moises Alou. I agree that it's particularly dangerous to have Barrett and Inglett as the backups in the infield but I think that it's a really good plan in that it allows us to have a solid defensive back-up catcher.

I also liked the idea of saving Cecil's service time unless he's really ready for the big show.

Man, I can't wait until ST!

Richard S.S. - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 07:48 AM EST (#196351) #

I read a lot of discouraging words about Jesse Litsch (24). Did people forget, Jul. 22 - Aug. 13, he learned in AAA, for the first time, how to throw a four-seam fastball. http://toronto.bluejays.mlb.com/mlb/minorleagues/team_index.jsp?c_id=tor (Gaps in address are this _ ). It seems like his year is broken into 4 seasons, with June and July being his winter. http://toronto.bluejays.mlb.com/stats/individual_player_gamebygamelog.jsp?c_id=tor&playerID=446209&statType=2 Jesse made only 6 bad starts, and had 2 shut outs, in 28 GS. Drop those and he shows a good year: 13-3 2.37 147.2 31/85 1.124. He should only get better; he's young enough to stay healthy.

Prior to 2008, David Purcey's(26) record was unremarkable, but he was an LHP. Did anyone one notice, that despite pitching approx. 40 - 50 more innings that ever before, David had a much better year than his records for 2006 and 2007 show. http://toronto.bluejays.mlb.com/stats/individual_player_gamebygamelog.jsp?c_id=tor&playerID=453515&statType=2 http://www.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?t=t_ibp&did=milb&cid=552 http://www.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?t=t_ibp&did=milb&cid=463&y=2007 http://www.minorleaguebaseball.com/milb/stats/stats.jsp?t=t_ibp&did=milb&cid=458&y=2005 Purcey should be a decent 4 - 5 starter this year.

Roy Halladay should be given a 5 - 7 year contract extention at $20 Million or more per year. He will continue to give value-for-value for many years; pay him closer to what he's worth.

christaylor - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 08:07 AM EST (#196352) #

Would McGowan be moved to the 60 day? My understanding from the news reports is that he's throwing already and is on target for opening day.

Thomas - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 10:07 AM EST (#196353) #

FanGraphs has an interesting post up (second from the top of the page as I type this) about second basemen. It points out that Hill is relatively undervalued compared to Hudson, as he outproduced him two of the past three seasons (except for last year, when he played half as many games). The post also indicates how much Hudson's defense seems to have slipped as he's entered his thirties. I know he wasn't considered the elite defender he was in Toronto, but his numbers are worse than I expected.

zeppelinkm - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 10:13 AM EST (#196354) #

I think Hill is vastly undervalued. Just reading the comments here and at other sites, where people think you could plug Inglett in and not realize a big decrease in performance (both offensive and defensive) made me realize how under-appreciated Hill is. He is remarkably good at playing 2B. Add in the fact that he can be a 40 doubles, 15 HR guy, and he's providing great value. He is not easy to replace.

On the note of 2B, there is a pretty upsetting article over at baseballmusings.com about Roberto Alomar. Will it affect his HOF chances? This is potentially the 2nd serious "black eye" on his character. I hope evidence comes out that proves the lawsuit is without merit.

Chuck - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 11:28 AM EST (#196359) #

I know he wasn't considered the elite defender he was in Toronto, but his numbers are worse than I expected.

I haven't seen Hudson play in Arizona so I can't offer up even a subjective argument to refute or defend those numbers. But studies have shown (I'd cite them if I could recall them) that it is the rare middle infielder whose defense doesn't significantly decline into his late 20's and early 30's. As we all know, defensive reputations outlast defensive ability, often for quite a long time. Hudson could very well be another data point.

Mylegacy - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 12:26 PM EST (#196363) #

In my book, Aaron Hill is not the full time 2nd baseman. Before he was injured last year I was very disappointed in his hitting. In 09 I see him platooning with Inglett at 2nd. It stays that way until he FORCES his way into full time - if he can. Hill is entering his age 27 year so he should be at or near his peak. Looking at him he has a VERY powerful looking chest and upper body - if all goes well for him, hopefully he gets 15 to 20 homers - I think if it all comes together he could "peak" there.

I'm off in a few minutes to Victoria for a couple of days of general debauchery with "she who must be obeyed" - you won't have me to kick around until the weekend. While I'm gone - go sign up Manny and trade Tallet for A-Roid - tell JP I'll kick in $20.00 a year from my debauchery allowance towards A-Roids keep.

zeppelinkm - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 02:01 PM EST (#196366) #

Mylegacy: Hitting aside, Hill and Inglett aren't close defensively. Hitting included, Hill is younger, has more potential, and has already had one season better then any Inglett will ever have. Hill is unquestionably the opening day starter, health assumed. He was one 5/5 game away last year from having a line around .290/.350 (avg/obp). One hot week and he could have easily been at 300/375/440 and then gotten injured and this wouldn't even be a conversation! You are judging him too harshly off a small sample of 50 inconsistant games offensively. Also - I would really love to see what Hill can do under Cito. Inglett had the benefit of playing the majority of the season with 3 hitting coaches, whereas Hill spent the first portion of the season hitting under the guidence of Gibbons and Denbo.

There is simply no reason to start Inglett over Hill. Inglett is older and entering his decline - we would thank our stars if he had a season as good as last year again. Hill is younger and entering his prime. Hill is clearly superior defensively. Hill has power potential, Inglett does not.

zeppelinkm - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 02:08 PM EST (#196369) #

My final point on the Hill - Inglett debate:

Inglett's BABIP last year was .331, considerably higher than league average (although I do understand each player seems to have their own BABIP range). Any regression towards the league average will greatly reduce Inglett's offensive contribution to the ball club. Inglett simply offers very little value if he posts a line like .285/.345/.390, which is what some moderate regression to the BABIP mean could easily do.

greenfrog - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 03:09 PM EST (#196373) #

I agree that Hill should start but it's nice to have Inglett (as opposed to Adams, Hector Luna or Edgardo Alfonso) waiting in the wings. Inglett deserves huge props for his performance last year--he may have kept his major-league career alive.

Mike Green - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 03:11 PM EST (#196374) #

Bobby Abreu has apparently signed 1 year contract for $5 million plus incentives. Maybe Moises Alou's price has gone down to $15.50 plus a new two-wheeler, in which case the home nine can sign him.

TamRa - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 03:44 PM EST (#196378) #

Prior to 2008 . . .

Richard, a lot of people still don't know that Purcey was diagnosed with and medicated for ADD recently (either last winter or the one before) and his ability to focus during games dramatically improved after that point.

I sometimes wonder if Rios shouldn't be checked for the same condition.

Pistol - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 04:07 PM EST (#196379) #

Maybe Moises Alou's price has gone down to $15.50 plus a new two-wheeler, in which case the home nine can sign him.

How much is this off season like an auction fantasy draft? Certain teams bid on a lot of players early for too much money (SF Giants) and then by the end teams are picking up bargains for next to nothing because there's no money left to spend.

Ron - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 04:10 PM EST (#196380) #

http://tsn.ca/mlb/story/?id=266682&lid=sublink02&lpos=headlines_main

"An ex-girlfriend of former Toronto Blue Jay Roberto Alomar filed an explosive lawsuit alleging the former baseball star insisted on unprotected sex for four years despite having AIDS."

Say it ain't so Robby.....

FisherCat - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 04:17 PM EST (#196382) #

Reports are that Adam Dunn just agreed to a 2-year $10 mil/yr deal with the Nationals.

It is so frustrating to see all these bargains out there and the Blue Jays aren't even the least bit active. I mean come on, Frank Thomas type money (circa 2007 that is) for a perennial 40 homer guy? If only JP hadn't bad mouthed Mr. Dunn last summer...

Chuck - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 04:24 PM EST (#196383) #

I mean come on, Frank Thomas type money

Worse yet, that's a little over half of what Thomas signed for.

Chuck - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 04:27 PM EST (#196384) #

Whoops. Brain fart. Didn't see that it was $10M/year. I thought it was $10M total.

Gerry - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 05:06 PM EST (#196385) #

The Jays have signed Kevin Millar to a contract for the 2009 season according to a press release. It is not clear whether Millar would report to Las Vegas if he didn't make the major league team.

Geoff - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 05:42 PM EST (#196389) #

Glad to hear the Jays have signed a free agent, but Kevin Millar? Is he going to turn everyone into idiots?

In the vast news breaking on Alomar, this CNN article has a juicy bit of scandalous sizzle, quoting Robbie that "he was raped by two Mexican men after playing a ball game when he was 17." This ex-girlfriend must have it in for him, or her lawyer really didn't want to pull any punches to throw that into the lawsuit. What purpose would it serve in the suit? Is she going to prove to the court that it happened? That Robbie knowingly contracted HIV that he denied ever having from that incident? Or just that he's reckless not to think it could have happened from that incident?

Needless to say, it will be curious to see how the man faces the music. For now his representation is saying, "he's healthy and he'd like to keep his health status private. We'll do our talking in court." So does he have 'full-blown' AIDS or not? Is he not going to face the public because he's not healthy and wants to protect his image or because his handlers think it's best he not show himself and answer the allegations? For some reason I can't imagine.

Gerry - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 05:46 PM EST (#196391) #

Remember the lawsuit is filed as part of a claim for money. This wouldn't be the first time that claims were overstated for financial reasons.

christaylor - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 06:04 PM EST (#196393) #

"CAN we assume that Doc (assuming he's still here) will be "in decline"?
Maddux didn't decline until 37
Johnson didn't decline until 41
Schilling had his best years at age 34-36"

I hate to bring up the PED monster in another thread... but... although, there's no reason to assume (here comes the heresay) that Doc is/was clean either.

Please don't jump on me... I'm just sayin'... boy, here I am, looking at the Halladay signed ball on my desk, beside the computer, feeling like a tool, but I think this had to be said.

christaylor - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 06:07 PM EST (#196394) #

Innocent until proven guilty, but man. If true, no HOF fame for you Robbie.

Bad joke coming...

"Catch de AIDS!"

greenfrog - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 06:15 PM EST (#196395) #

"a perennial 40 homer guy"

You weren't kidding. Dunn's HR totals over the last five years: 46, 40, 40, 40, 40. He must have adopted a work-to-rule policy in 2005...

VBF - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 09:11 PM EST (#196398) #

Innocent until proven guilty, but man. If true, no HOF fame for you Robbie.

Can a civil suit not related at all to baseball, years after retirement cost someone induction in the Hall of Fame?

Of all the things stopping people entry into the Hall of Fame, I think this has to rank the lowest.

christaylor - Wednesday, February 11 2009 @ 10:26 PM EST (#196400) #

With McGwire stuck at 25% in the voting, Rice being elected because he was "feared" - I wouldn't put anything past the voters.

seeyou - Thursday, February 12 2009 @ 02:28 AM EST (#196403) #

MLBtraderumors is reporting that the Jays have signed another Japanese player: Shigeki Noguchi, a 35-year-old ... wait for it.. LH reliever!

Seems unlikely that he'll get a taste of the majors, unless the 10-15 other relievers on the 40-man all come down with some injury simultaneously. But at least the Jays are making inroads in Japan, maybe this will help convince more higher-profile Japanese players to sign with the Jays in the future.

John Northey - Thursday, February 12 2009 @ 04:46 PM EST (#196412) #

Wow. The Jays site lists 27 pitchers on the 40 man, then another 7 on the 'non-roster invitees' list without including Noguchi. That makes it 35 pitchers in camp. Wow.

Meanwhile just 1 catcher is on the 40 man (Barajas) with 6 more non-roster guys. So 7 catchers vs 35 pitchers = 5 pitchers per catcher. I suspect a few guys will be around (bullpen catcher, etc.) to help out with those pitchers otherwise we'll have 7 very tired catchers come opening day. Maybe Russ Adams will want to learn how to catch so his career might continue :) FYI: The 7 catchers are Barajas, Barrett, Thigpen, JP Arencibia, Jeroloman, Raul Chavez, and Kyle Phillips.

uglyone - Thursday, February 12 2009 @ 04:57 PM EST (#196413) #

Since we're all worried that our Bullpen would get overabused this year with less quality starting innings from the rotation, heck, why not use our great reliever depth and carry 8 relievers?

Ryan, Downs, League, Carlson, Accardo, Tallet, Frasor, Wolfe.

timpinder - Thursday, February 12 2009 @ 05:17 PM EST (#196414) #

Having 8 relievers would certainly be nice if it were possible, but even with 7 relievers the Jays aren't going to have enough room for Bautista, Inglett, Millar and McDonald. Any thoughts on who will be the odd man out at the start of the season? Bautista is needed in case Rolen misses time, McDonald will be required as the backup SS unless the Jays plan on moving Hill over, which leaves Inglett and Millar to fight it out for the last spot on the bench. My guess is that Millar gets the spot because his righty bat will fit in well with Snider and Lind and the Jays have 4 outfielders assuming Lind and Snider are both up, making Inglett a little less useful.

uglyone - Thursday, February 12 2009 @ 05:52 PM EST (#196415) #

Hill can handle the move.

He'd be a decent defensive SS, with at least average range and an above average arm.

92-93 - Thursday, February 12 2009 @ 06:19 PM EST (#196416) #

He'd be a decent defensive SS, with at least average range and an above average arm.

How do you know? I definitely don't think of Hill as possessing a cannon, and all he's ever said is that he's more comfortable at 2B and isn't interested in moving. Better we get him back for a full year at 2B and he continues to grow into the player we all saw him becoming in 2007.

SheldonL - Thursday, February 12 2009 @ 08:01 PM EST (#196417) #

People on this site are awfully defensive about Hill playing SS.
He was drafted as a SS; he played SS all the way through the minors. He was forced to play 3B when he was called up because of Koskie's broken finger. He displayed a very good arm at 3B which means that his arm is good enough for SS.
His bat forced him into the lineup as a 2B (only because J.P and the gang believed in Russ Adams at SS), and his intelligence and hard work showed as he quickly learned a new position.
The biggest thing is the pivoting to throw across the body and double plays.

He got a shot at SS for 121 innings/16 games and he played errorless baseball.
I think having his bat at SS instantly gives us the best the SS in the AL. I'd rather have Inglet and his .762 OPS than Scutaro's sub .700 OPS.

Anyone who claims that Hill should stay at 2B because he's a top-tier defensive 2B makes a silly argument.
Omar Vizquel would have been an amazing defensive second baseman... in fact, any SS with any sort of work ethic would be a really good defensive second baseman.

It's not about making Aaron Hill the best SS in the AL, it's about making the best out of the team you've got. And right now, Inglett's better than the hybrid Scutaro/Johnny Mac.

seeyou - Thursday, February 12 2009 @ 08:09 PM EST (#196418) #

My guess is that Millar gets the spot because his righty bat will fit in well with Snider and Lind and the Jays have 4 outfielders assuming Lind and Snider are both up, making Inglett a little less useful.

Wow, I view that completely differently. If anyone should have a secure spot on the bench next year it�s Inglett.

Yes, Bautista plays an important role as an insurance policy for Rolen. But what about an insurance policy for Hill? It wasn�t too many months ago that it was seriously in doubt whether Hill would ever be able to play again. I�m stoked that it seems he�s fully recovered, but at best I�m cautiously optimistic. And if Hill did have to miss significant time, I really don�t want to see Scutaro or Bautista as our default 2B option.

And Millar being RH is a benefit given that Lind, Snider and Overbay are all lefties, but on the other hand (*cough*), Inglett is the only LH infielder we have other than Overbay, so he has at least as much strategic importance.

I think people underestimate just how good Inglett�s 2008 was (second best AVG among Jays with at least 300 PA). Despite some defensive shortcomings, I�d argue 2008 performance was clearly better than Bautista and Millar, and probably better than Scutaro as well.

Mike Green - Thursday, February 12 2009 @ 09:44 PM EST (#196419) #

Fangraphs has now added UZR arm numbers to its defensive profiles. UZR now appears to have Alex Rios as the best defensive outfielder in the American League over the last 5 years, and better when he plays centerfield than Sizemore or Granderson by a significant margin. Not all rating systems agree, of course.

SheldonL - Thursday, February 12 2009 @ 10:47 PM EST (#196420) #

There has been a debate in philosophy for years about the existence of any objective truths.

A lot of people on this site seem to trust without a measure of doubt some of these stats. While I agree that statistics are a good indicator of what a player has done in the past, you can't really determine what a player's future will look like.

Moreover, I don't think that you can necessarily compare two players defensively based on stats like UZR or ZR...

I like stats as much as the next guy but the creation of new defensive rating stats and hitting stats is really part of a type of baseball philosophy that believes in making a machine out of a player, in deciding objectively the rating of a player.
This I think is a project doomed to failure. There are so many variables in baseball and the crazy part is that these variables are constantly changing and never allow for the EXACT frame of reference. All one can do is think critically in assessing a player, not resort to statistics that are not even close to determining objective worth.

greenfrog - Thursday, February 12 2009 @ 10:52 PM EST (#196421) #

My impression was always that scouts thought Hill had the arm but not the range for SS, while Adams had the range but not the arm (at least, this was true earlier in their careers). A player can have good range at 2B but below-average range as a SS. My guess is the debate will continue until the Jays come up with a decent SS (Justin Jackson might be that player eventually) or Hill plays a couple of more seasons at 2B, thereby entrenching himself as a non-SS.

The Jays really aren't that far off from having a good team in 2010, assuming everyone stays healthy. I hope Rogers is a bit less frugal a year from now b/c the team could vault back into contention with a couple of astute additions (although next year's free agent market is apparently looking pretty sketchy). I'm not holding my breath, though.

John Northey - Thursday, February 12 2009 @ 11:43 PM EST (#196422) #

Speaking of FanGraph's defensive stats... Hill's time at SS isn't impressive based on their numbers. 79 games, 61 starts, UZR/150 = -19.5

Namely, Hill at SS over a full season would be (based on the time he spent there in the majors shortly after he had played there in the minors) a negative on defense. Lifetime at 2B he is at 10.6 per 150 games (the figure is runs above/below replacement saved).

For comparison, Scutaro's SS numbers work out to a +5 per 150 lifetime and +19.7 last year (possible improvement due to the strong defensive coaching the Jays have). McDonald is at 4.6 per 150 lifetime and last year was at -3.5 (yes, negative) per 150.

Given these stats, mixed with McDonald's age (34 right now) I would not be in the slightest surprised to see McDonald released at the end of spring training. Cito used him a fair amount in September last year, but I suspect he was trying to figure out if there is anything in the tank. From the looks of it, there isn't.

SheldonL - Friday, February 13 2009 @ 01:19 AM EST (#196423) #

wow, I guess I could come up with a formula that calculates anything and people on this site would accept this as gospel!

Let me explain how UZR/150 works.

UZR = [(total number of catches/total number of balls hit in zone) - (total number of all ball caught by all specific position players/total number of balls hit to all such specific position players) X (number of balls caught by the player)

Put simply, it's the Zone Range (balls caught divided by balls in your play) of a player subtracting the TOTAL Zone Range of all players playing his position.
Then you multiply by the total number of catches the player made.

Of course, I find fault with Zone Range itself. You could play on a team where you have strong groundball pitchers and you barely get any flyballs as an outfielder. Of course, there could be a rash of bloops that ruin your zone range or there could be lazy flyballs (when they do happen) making your zone rating much better.
Then of course, the difference would be positive if you had a higher zone range. But if you happen to have had more catches as a SS (i.e. more line drives your way) than your teammate RF, you get a better UZR/150.
All of a sudden, you're much better than he is!

What's worse is that if you have even an infinitesimally negative UZR (i.e. your zone rating was like 0.01 below league average) but you had 1000 balls hit at you, you get a -10 UZR/150. Is that fair?

Of course, not!

If you look at the UZR/150 ratings, you've got some Gold GLove calibre players with absurd negative figures, Jermaine Dye -20.3, Torii Hunter -13, Curtis Granderson -12.8, Orlando Hudson -9.3

We've all seen Johnny Mac make some incredible plays during his time here, including last season. Using traditional defensive stats, he made 9 errors at his best position SS which is roughly 22 errors for a full season in 2008.
In 2007, he made 8 in 102 games which is roughly 13 in a full season.
In 2006, he made 14 in 90 games which is about 25 in a full season.
In 2005, he made 3 in 32 games which is roughly 16 in a full season.
Prior to being a Jay, he made 13 errors in 116 games, which is about 18 a year.
These are all based at SS.

Those errors look like a lot and they are, but are they an indicator of how good John MacDonald is?
I don't think so. The UZR/150 of his the past 3 years are 3.6, 15.4 and -3.5 at SS. That tells me nothing because the John McDonald over 2006-08 provided superior defense to most fans and UZR has him as a below average fielder last year, exceptional the year before and a bit above average 3 years ago.

Torri Hunter, Jose Reyes and Omar Vizquel are considered superior defenders. Their career UZR/150 is -2.3, 2.8 and 6.9 respectively.
Are you telling me that Torii Hunter has been a below average CF!?

I guess my point is that numbers lie. Stats tell you nothing. The good ones describe past events and do so very superficially. They aren't very good prognosticators. And in most cases as used by most Bauxites, they're vague, non-transparent and absolutely unproved.

As for Hill playing defense at SS, by no means is it easy to play a position that you haven't played in a few years. It only makes sense that he struggled during the short experiment with him at SS; after all he had grown comfortable playing at 2B for almost a year. Moreover, he was still a young and improving fielder in general at the time. He still would be if we moved him but you can't use defensive stats to predict how he would (re)learn the position.

greenfrog - Friday, February 13 2009 @ 09:00 AM EST (#196424) #

On a purely subjective basis, I thought J-Mac was only OK defensively in 2008. In 2007, he was nothing short of brilliant, which seems to be reflected in the UZR stats. And 13 errors over a full season is actually quite a modest total for a SS.

Mike Green - Friday, February 13 2009 @ 09:16 AM EST (#196425) #

SheldonL,

Fangraphs has UZR beginning in 2002. Hunter is a big centerfielder who came up in 1998. UZR had as above-average for 2002-05 (I'd bet that he was great from 98-01) and then well below average from 2006 when he was injured. That is a typical career pattern for a big centerfielder who was fast when he was young. All too often, clubs are too slow to move them to the corners.

John Northey - Friday, February 13 2009 @ 10:35 AM EST (#196426) #

So SheldonL - how do you judge defense? Errors are a terrible method as I'd rather have a guy who makes 500 outs and makes 100 errors than the guy who makes 100 outs without an error (for a super-extreme example). A more relevant example was Rance Mulliniks who made very, very few errors but also had very poor range at third for the Jays in the 80's.

UZR is taking total plays made divided by total chances for a play, much like a batting average for fielders. Not perfect, but it certainly gives a good first impression. To move it to a more advanced stat you need to add in how hard the ground balls are / how fast the line drives are, then mix in speed of runners. Still, it sure beats errors and is far stronger than 'I know what I saw'. For more details on UZR check here, here, and here.

McDonald is a SS who has passed his peak, who always relied exclusively on his defense for a job. All studies I've read have shown that hitting skills drop drastically around age 32. From observation over the years (haven't done a check on the figures) it appears most players are forced down the defensive spectrum in their early 30's so McDonald having a peak season in 2007 (late career year) then dropping back to a more normal decline phase makes sense to me. Scutaro was in Oakland but Toronto has an excellent infield coach in Butterfield so an improvement (less than he showed, but an improvement) isn't a shock although his history in Oakland suggests a drop should occur to (at best) league average, especially considering he isn't a young pup (33 years old). The Jays, if they are smart, will chase a new defensive wiz kid (ideally 25 or less) to replace McDonald as the defensive wiz backup and hope that one of our kids with promise matures quickly.

John Northey - Friday, February 13 2009 @ 10:46 AM EST (#196427) #

Y'know, I got to thinking about it and checked the spring roster. Watch for Angel Sanchez. He is entering his age 25 season and is a defense first SS (20 1/3 innings in majors with a +41.2 UZR per 150 rating which he'd never keep up long term, but it sure doesn't hurt) who can play 2B and even caught a game in the minors in 2004. 663 OPS in the minors lifetime, but given he would be replacing McDonald I don't think that matters much :P

The other shortstop invited to spring is Brandon Fahey who also can't hit (651 OPS in minors, 53 OPS+ in majors over 455 PA's) but is older (entering his age 28 season) and has a fair amount of time in the outfield, suggesting his SS defense is probably not the best (-16 UZR/150 lifetime but double digit positive at 2B and OF).

92-93 - Friday, February 13 2009 @ 11:06 AM EST (#196428) #

"He displayed a very good arm at 3B which means that his arm is good enough for SS."

I'm not saying Hill doesn't have the arm to play SS, but this is a common misconception - the throw from 3B is actually shorter than from SS in most instances, not longer.

SheldonL - Friday, February 13 2009 @ 12:28 PM EST (#196429) #

MikeGreen, Torii Hunter has won a Gold Glove in each of the last 8 seasons. In my view, he has been really awesome in each of those seasons; he hasn't slowed down at all. FanGraphs have calculated his UZR/150 for the last seven seasons, they are as follows:
0.4, 12.4, -0.2, 4.3, -12.8, -6.1, -13.0
UZR/150 tells me rather incorrectly that he was below average in 4 of those seasons, about average in one, a little above average in another and well above average in another.
In 2003, it was almost unanimous among Bauxites that Vernon Wells should have won his first Gold Glove; he posted a -19.3 UZR/150 that year. They've got Carlos Beltran as a negative in two of the last 4 years.

JohnNorthey, I don't mean to use errors as an indicator of good defense as I posted a lot about John McDonald, who I think was and is fabulous, and his errors. I guess what I'm trying to say is that statistics is very flawed and to use it as some sort of objective measure is uber-flawed.
I urge Bauxites not to judge between who is better defensively or offensively because to judge presupposes an objective framework. That is, to judge supposes that there is a clear objective mark that delineates Gold Glove defense, average defense, etc. There are so many variables, like frequency of balls hit in your zone which depends on whether your pitchers are predominantly flyball pitchers or groundball pitchers which sort of depends on the kind of opposition (i.e. AL hitters tend to be more power hitters so naturally the flyball tendencies of pitchers are affected).
The kind of criticism of defense and offense that I propose is not judging but evaluating.
You might think that I'm playing a game of semantics here but I'm not, really. Evaluating means to take a players season as a sort of plane which acts as a framework. You evaluate by considering the concepts at play on this plane; that is, you evaluate the variables at play in this player's context (i.e. his division, his pitchers, his park). Unlike ERA+, OPS +, this evaluation doesn't attempt to objectivate these varaibles/conditions.
Furthermore, you HAVE TO, and I can't stress this enough, you HAVE TO watch the player at least for 120 games in a year. You can't evaluate the player without seeing him at his craft.
You might argue that what I'm using here is subjective criterion to which I would reply that it's not purely subjective. Part of it is subjective, but a lot of it requires other subjects (i.e. other Bauxites, other fans, television angles...) to determine the player's abilities.

92-93, yes, I agree that it's a common misconception to think that one who plays 3rd base must have a great arm and certainly a better arm than the SS.
I think that neither necessarily has a better arm but that one would have to have similar arm strength to play either position.
Draw a square on a piece of paper to create the infield. Make sure that the diagonal of the square is the length of a pen/pencil. Connect the pen to from first base to 3B; now fix the pen at 1B and rotate the pen with the other end where the SS would be. I think that you'll find that the distance is same.
Therefore, no one can argue that Aaron Hill does not have the arm to play SS.

Mike Green - Friday, February 13 2009 @ 01:29 PM EST (#196431) #

MGL, the creator of UZR, has said that you really need to look at 3 years of UZR data to get a picture. If you do that, Beltran is basically still an above-average defender, as he has been throughout his career. One would expect him to fade rather more gently than Hunter has. As for your impression that Torii Hunter remains a GG quality centerfielder, I can tell you that most people who observe him as home fans do not agree.

It is not only single-season fielding statistics which can be deceiving. The ERA+ leaders for the Jays last year were Scott Downs (239) and Jesse Carlson (190). Yes, they were good, but not better than Roy Halladay.

Subjectivity does matter. I believe that Aaron Hill would have been at least average defensively at shortstop if he had been left there, although I am not sure how he would do if he were to be moved now. I also believe that Rios was always a better defender than Wells (I am in the minority on that one), but is a much better one now.

John Northey - Friday, February 13 2009 @ 02:48 PM EST (#196433) #

Mike - great point on how it takes longer for defensive stats to mean much. I am using UZR right now mainly because it is free and easy to get to and I generally like the concept of it (plays divided by chances vs others at the same position). Other defensive stats are out there too and to get a full picture I think multiple sources should be used. However, for a quick comment I'm not bothering :)

McDonald concerns me as he didn't seem to be that good last year in the field by my eyesight (vs 2007 when he seemed amazing) and he is at the age when cliff diving for players occurs frequently. McDonald's UZR went down drastically (limited playing time) as did his RZR (to 807 from 845 - his worst result as a Jay, Scutaro came out as an 874 after 792, 789 and 798 seasons in Oakland). McDonald's fielding Win Shares per 162 games (9 innings per game) work out to 9.7 for 2007 and 4.0 for 2008 (5.3 and 5.7 for 2006 & 2005). For McDonald losing anything in the field equals no more career and the stats strongly suggest (to me at least) that 2008 was a big drop and unless the Jays know it was a temporary thing (some nagging injury that is now better or something) then it is time to eat the $1.9 million he is owed for 2009 and move on. If he was under 30 I would figure it as a one year blip, but entering his age 34 season...

Petey Baseball - Friday, February 13 2009 @ 04:47 PM EST (#196437) #

MLB Trade Rumors has the Blue Jays still somewhat interested in Orlando Cabrera. Funny thing is, they mention that he is probably out of Oakland's price range but don't specify just actually what has been offered.

John I`m in the same boat. At this point, Johnny Mac is in the decline of his career and we cannot expect him to play shortstop the way he did in `06, `07 and `08. Therefore, I`m in favor of the Jays leaving him off the team come April. Either see if we can get Cabrera for cheap and have Scoot as the utility man, or go with Scoot for 130 games at short and try to patch the holes with Bautista and some minor league help.

John Northey - Friday, February 13 2009 @ 05:00 PM EST (#196438) #

Didn't notice that Orlando Cabrera still hasn't signed anywhere. OPS+ of 86 lifetime, entering his age 34 season I'd be very careful about anything beyond a one year deal. Fangraphs lists his UZR per 150 as 7.2 lifetime and 15.4 last year after a 9.1 the year before. His last 4 years were all listed as being worth $10+ million and since 2002 his lowest value shown is $3 million. The 4 projection systems listed have him with a 705-709 OPS with a 325-332 OBP.

Given all of that I'd certain give him the deal Eckstein got last year (one year, $4.5 - this year he is signed by SD for $850k). Sadly I think he is after a whole lot more ($9 million according to Rotoworld) and he would also cost the Jays their first round draft pick. Might be better to hunt down someone else.

Doom Service - Friday, February 13 2009 @ 11:59 PM EST (#196442) #

Orlando Cabrera gives me the Royce Clayton shivers.

Mylegacy - Saturday, February 14 2009 @ 12:06 AM EST (#196443) #

Now that I'm back in Nanaimo, having returned from beautiful downtown Victoria (I stay at the Laurel Point Inn - and higly recommend it), and my two nights of pleasuring "she who must be obeyed," - I'd like to take one more trip over the "Hill."

Robert MacLeod at the Globe says that Hill has "...put on a few pounds" but that Hill says "it hasn't affected his speed or agility." Robert speculates that Hill may gain some power. Interesting, in an earlier post in this thread - where I was saying in my mind Hill had to EARN his job back - I remarked on Hill's thick upper body which I thought should help him hit for more power than he shows. I'll be delighted it Hill hits for more power - 20 homers would be nice - thank you - even if his defense fell to just wonderful instead of exceptional.

By the way, when I left Victoia this morning it was sunny and 10 degrees - not so worse. Life here on Vancouver Island is SO tough..oh well back to looking out at ships in Nanaimo harbour - "Sweetheart - could you bring me a beer? A Corona would be nice."

Work, work, work, work...

SheldonL - Saturday, February 14 2009 @ 12:51 AM EST (#196445) #

You're living the life, Mylegacy!

Thomas - Saturday, February 14 2009 @ 01:20 AM EST (#196446) #

I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere, so I thought I'd point out that the Jays have signed Dirk Hayhurst to a minor league contract. He's one guy in particular I hope gets to see some major league action this year, even if it's a September cameo. Unfortunately, I think he's about 13th on the bullpen depth chart.

ayjackson - Saturday, February 14 2009 @ 02:43 PM EST (#196449) #

This may be worthy of its own thread. Very revealing quotes from McLeod's blog today (from RCI vice-chariman, Phil Lind):

And if you want to take issue over the decision to cut payroll, Lind said to take it up with Paul Beeston, the Jays interim president. That was his call, Lind said.

�He's in charge of what payroll we come up with and all that is in his hands,� Lind said. �He recommends to us.�

scottt - Saturday, February 14 2009 @ 07:19 PM EST (#196450) #

Cabrera would be a decent leadoff option, but unless I'm mistaken, he's a type A free agent and would cost a pick.

The knock I have against Millar is that Bautista is already a RH LF/DH. If you want to rest Rolen, there's not much point in doing it against left handers.

I'm eager to see how long overbay will continue to start against LH pitching with offensive numbers worse than McDonald's.

Cito's Pitching Use | 80 comments | Create New Account

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