Batter's Box Interactive Magazine - Long Dark Teatime of the Soul Approaches

Long Dark Teatime of the Soul Approaches

The Blue Jays' attempt to build a contending team has failed.

2008 was our best chance and the year we needed to make every effort to win. If not for the injury to Aaron Hill, which prolonged the misguided Johnny Mac experiment, management might have pulled the trigger on a few mid-season deals for a pennant push. As it was, the Jays hung around the fringes of the race and couldn't keep pace with their rich neighbours and the surging Rays.

With the departure of AJ Burnett, and no significant talent flowing into the organisation, it was clear to all but the rose-coloured glasses lot that the hot start this season merely masked reality.

What looms for Blue Jays fans for the foreseeable future is one of two scenarios. The first, and more probable, is a slow descent. The core of the team ages and there are not enough spare parts and prospects to fill the holes. This would be in keeping with JP Ricciardi's methods – his greatest strength being the acquisition of under-appreciated talent.

The second scenario involves blowing up the team by trading away the key players (with the exception of Aaron Hill) for a collection of B+ and B prospects, with (hopefully) the odd grade A variety in the mix. Not likely given Ricciardi's penchant for caution on the trade front, but he may yet surprise.

The long decline scenario is more probable because of bullpen depth and a bountiful crop of back end of the rotation guys. Not enough talent to contend, but enough to avoid being truly miserable. Hitting prospects are a lot thinner on the ground, which is why the Jays should try to obtain at least one grade A hitter in any Halladay trade.

Tough Neighbourhood:

Context is king in baseball, and the fact that the Jays must compete in the AL East and not the AL Central, makes the dark teatime phase inevitable. Let us survey the near future of the toughest division in baseball ...

The Red Sox are the most enviable organisation in baseball. They have a stadium which generates exceptional revenue, a super-smart front office, elite players in their prime and more quality young pitchers without a spot in the rotation than any other team in baseball.

The Yankees are (of course) obscenely wealthy and are getting smarter. Despite the gradual decline of key members of the offense (Jeter, Posada, Damon, A-Rod) they have the resources to fill in holes as the appear

The Rays still have a great young core, and have been able to fill out the roster with useful players.

The Orioles have the making of a serviceable if not great starting rotation with youngsters Tillman, Arrieta and Matusz. They also have a group of young hitters (Jones, Markakis, Wieters and Reimold) that will form the core of a solid offense for years to come. This team could gel in a hurry and possibly put together a “miracle” run in 2010 reminiscent of the 2008 Rays.

That leaves our beloved Blue Jays: young talent inferior to the Rays or Orioles, and financial resources which pale beside the Sox and Yanks.

The Endgame.

So what happens after a series of 5th place finishes, declining attendance (again), and a revolving door of spare parts mixed in with the occasional exciting player?

Welcome to the world of the Oakland A's – that would be the happy outcome. If our next general manager isn't as bright as the current man, following in the Pirates' footsteps could be our fate. If the team remains financially neglected, its relocation will cease to be an unthinkable nightmare. Possibly the only way out is the appearance of a white knight with deep pockets.

A few years ago I would never have imagined I'd come around to this, but what this team needs most is someone like George Steinbrenner.

Posted by robertdudek on Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 02:01 AM EDT.

Long Dark Teatime of the Soul Approaches | 60 comments | Create New Account

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

christaylor - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 02:30 AM EDT (#202797) #

There's nothing in the post that hasn't been said before. Also it relies entirely on the assumption that the Jays have, "bountiful crop of back end of the rotation guys". Romero and Cecil are probably not back end of the rotation guys. Count me among the "rose coloured glasses" people and disagree.

There's also a problem with the logic. If 2008 was "the best year to contend", barring trades/rebuilding, how far off will the 2010 be from the 2010 be? Not very, assuming Barajas/Scutaro are resigned.

Subtractions: No AJ Burnett of course, but he in 2008 didn't even have enough value at the deadline to be traded and was awful until the final two months. No Eck and that's a good thing. No Stairs/Thomas. Also good things.

Additions: Romero, Cecil, Snider at the very least. That has to be considered a net positive to the 2008 team.

I suppose to sum up, the logic is fishy if you assume 2008 was our best year to contend, because 2010 looks brighter with not very drastic assumptions. If on the other hand, you want to assert the Jays never really have had a shot, be my guest as that position is more consistent than saying that in 2008 the team was a contender and 2010 will the first year in a long string of 5th place finishes.

Sano - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 04:53 AM EDT (#202798) #

Yes the Rays/Orioles have great young talent according to all sources. But let's keep in mind that the Rays will have to start paying for that talent as their players become FA's and I suspect that the Yankees/Red Sox will come sniffing around when that happens. Also, the Orioles have that great core, but let's account for injuries, regression, prospect failures and, well, not so rosy.

All of that aside, the Jays are bound for AL East mediocrity for a while until something changes, either we get owners who are willing to pony up the cash required to compete, or we get a GM who's smarter than the one we have right now. I think JP's done very well with the cards he's been dealt, but we are in the toughest division in baseball and basically we need a genius plus a whole lot of luck to expect to beat out the Sox and Yanks (let alone the Rays/Orioles).

Life's unfair...

China fan - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 05:36 AM EDT (#202800) #

In the great RollerCoaster of Jays Fandom, the pessimists and the gloom-doomers are again ascendant. Endless 5th-place finishes are predicted, oblivion and blow-ups are eagerly anticipated.... But what the pessimists forget is that the Jays still have among the best pitchers -- and young pitchers -- in the game. And good pitching is about three-quarters of the key to baseball success. Whether Halladay stays -- or whether he is traded for a package that will surely include another good pitcher -- the Jays will have an excellent rotation in 2010. Halladay or his replacement, Romero and Marcum will be the core -- and, sorry, these are not "bottom of the rotation" pitchers. Then two of the following: Litsch, Zep, Cecil, Richmond, Mills, Ray etc. There is plenty of depth and potential there. Tallet and Janssen return to relief to strengthen the bullpen, which again becomes one of the better ones around with Downs as the closer. As for the lineup: a year ago the pessimists were moaning that the Jays were crippled by the lack of a good SS and 3B. Those problems are already solved, and Scutaro will be re-signed. The Jays still need a Big Scary Bat at DH but that's one of the easier problems to solve in the offseason. Hill at 2B is a potential MVP, while Lind and Snider in the outfield will allow the Jays to drastically reduce their dependence on Wells and Rios, who need to be at the bottom of the lineup or gone. Sorry, doom-and-gloomers, you'll be waiting a long time for your much-cherished 5th place finish.

robertdudek - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 06:14 AM EDT (#202801) #

(response to christaylor)

There's nothing in the post that hasn't been said before.

Of course you are right, but I'd like to think that I've connected a few dots here.

Also it relies entirely on the assumption that the Jays have, "bountiful crop of back end of the rotation guys". Romero and Cecil are probably not back end of the rotation guys. Count me among the "rose coloured glasses" people and disagree.

I don't see Romero and Cecil as ace material. Every year there are dozens of guys who emerge as Romero has this year. David Purcey did last year. Very few of them become solid all-stars.

I suppose to sum up, the logic is fishy if you assume 2008 was our best year to contend, because 2010 looks brighter with not very drastic assumptions.

It looks bright to you if you assume everything goes well, and that the competition stands still. If Hill and Scutaro repeat their career year, if Barajas is retained (doubtful), if an adequate replacement can be found for Rolen (very unlikely) when he leaves; if Rios or Wells are not traded for prospects, if Lind can hold his gains, if Snider fulfills his potential - THEN the 2010 Jays will have a good offense. Most of that won't happen and the Jays offense will be below par, because salary will have to be bled. And the competition hasn't stood still.

(response to Sano)

But let's keep in mind that the Rays will have to start paying for that talent as their players become FA's and I suspect that the Yankees/Red Sox will come sniffing around when that happens.

It's true that a few years down the road the Rays will start to bleed talent, but they have enough premium talent with little or no service time (Zobrist, Price, Niemann, Davis, Jennings, Longoria) to stay comfortably ahead of the aging Blue Jays, though they will have great difficulty keeping up with the Sox and Yanks.

Also, the Orioles have that great core, but let's account for injuries, regression, prospect failures and, well, not so rosy.

How exactly are the Jays going to be immune from injuries, regression and prospect failures? The difference is that Baltimore has more established young talent and better pitching prospects, as well as a nicer stadium (which likely means more money to spend to fill in the holes).

or we get a GM who's smarter than the one we have right now.

Unlikely in my view. I've been critical of JP over the years, but the truth is he's done a good job when his budget was limited, not as good when he had more money to spend. Since we are now solidly in a tight budget phase, I think he's probably as good a choice in these conditions as anyone out there.

(response to China fan)

But what the pessimists forget is that the Jays still have among the best pitchers -- and young pitchers -- in the game.

I don't see how you can anyone can hold this view. No one ranks the Jays minor league pitchers as a group very highly: Cecil was the only one most people had ranked in the top 50 pitching prospects before this season. Marcum is the only one that can be considered a top flight young pitcher - and god knows if he'll ever be as good as he was before the injury. Litsch (if he returns), Rzepczynski and Richmond are soft-tossers who rely on the defense. Mills and Ray are marginal prospects at best. The Jays' excellent defense makes a lot of pitchers look better than they are. Unfortunately, Lind and Snider, the club's two best young hitters, are defensive liabilities and Aaron Hill isn't young in baseball terms anymore. Thus we should expect a decline in the quality of the defense over the coming years.

I've already addressed the offense, but try subtracting 3 of the following 5 - Rios, Wells, Rolen, Scutaro and Barajas - without replacing them with established talent. Then see how good the offense looks. I'll wager that 3 of the 5 players named above will not finish the 2010 season on the Jays active roster..

Sorry, doom-and-gloomers, you'll be waiting a long time for yor much-cherished 5th place finish.

TOR 44-47
BAL 40-49

Yes, I may have to wait until the end of September.

brent - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 08:22 AM EDT (#202802) #

http://toronto.bluejays.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20090717&content_id=5905848&vkey=news_tor&fext=.jsp&c_id=tor

I am glad that Tallet is moving back to the pen. He did an outstanding job filling in.

Frank Markotich - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 10:23 AM EDT (#202803) #

I think Robert has put it accurately. A tad over-pessimistic perhaps, but that's Robert and I tend to err on the side of optimism myself.

The team is coming to a crossroads - a double crossroads perhaps.

Crossroads #1 is what to do in the immediate to near future. Go into rebuilding mode or try to win in the next season or two. I think a hard-headed logical view dictates rebuilding, so trade Halladay and Rolen, and whatever other moves fit the objective. But either way the decision has to be made.

Crossroads #2 is how does ownership intend to operate the club. Are they committed to providing the financial resources to compete in the AL East or are they content to muddle along in the middle somewhere. I have a suspicion it may be the latter, which is why I don't like corporate ownership. The team has been able to compete with the big boys in the past, and was itself one of the big boys in payroll terms. This is not a small market, Toronto doesn't see itself as an underdog, and this market won't accept the "we can't afford to compete" line and give unquestioning support.

I agree that a "Steinbrenner" is what we need, although we can do without some of the nastier qualities. If only Ballsillie was a baseball fan.

TimberLee - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 10:25 AM EDT (#202804) #

I have been visiting this site for some time and enjoy the various opinions, especially the civil manner in which they are generally presented. This commentary recognizes the presence of the elephant. Unfortunately, I think it is right on. The Blue Jay future appears dismal to me, and I am a usually optimistic person. It is becoming increasingly difficult to remain focused on the positives because they are getting harder to find.

robertdudek - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 10:32 AM EDT (#202805) #

I think Guy Laliberte would be a great owner - if we could persuade him that baseball is more worthy of his attention than Les Canadiens.

His credentials as a creative businessman are impeccable. I'd bet he'd be on board with hiring a cutting-edge, sabermetric-inspired management team.

jerjapan - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 11:30 AM EDT (#202807) #

In the great RollerCoaster of Jays Fandom, the pessimists and the gloom-doomers are again ascendant.

We have played 15 years without meaningful baseball in the second half ... not even close to a playoff spot in the wildcard era. As Robert says, we don't have the finances to compete financially with the big boys, nor the prospects to compete with the Rays and possibly the Orioles in a few years. Maybe we can find a middle ground between those two models ...

On the pitching front, Romero and Marcum are not bottom of the rotation pitchers - they are middle of the rotation pitchers. Most observers have always said this is Romero's ceiling - does one strong professional season in 5 change this? Marcum's injury was serious - if he comes back as effective as he was - mid-rotation starter - that would be great. So there, we have a strong 3 and 4 guy. One of Cecil of Zep could be a good number 2, and the list of pitchers you mention does provide depth at 5 and 6, and in the pen. So, despite a true number one, our pitching is pretty good, with lots of upper minor league depth.

But offenseively? Pitching prospects have arguable dragged our minor league system up from the bottom of the pack into the middle (and please, feel free to point me to an outside observer who thinks we are better than that - but i think middle of the pick is being generous). However, nearly all of our significant positional prospects this year have stalled or struggled. With the big club, Scutaro's great - but this season reeks of career year, and Rolen is, while a fabulous comeback story, obviously in the decline phase of his career at an old 34. Hill is having a great year, but is not a 'potential MVP' in anything but a career year sense of the term. You say that Rios need and Wells need to be 'at the bottom of the order or gone' as if anyone would take Wells' contract, or give value back in exchange for Rios. And you don't even mention the possiblity that Halladay leaves as a free agent, which given JPs disinclination to trade vets for prospects, seems the likely outcome to me.

We can count on a good - not excellent - pitching staff next year, and an offense about the same if we get more from Snider, Rios and Wells (likely) and less from two or three of Hill, Rolen, Scutaro and Lind - with Snider being a true wildcard. Dopirack also seems like he might be able to make an impact next year, but none of the other hitting prospects seem ready to contribute. Overall, in my mind, this means third place at best. Even if one of the Yanks, Rays or Sox slips, we still have to beat the rest of the AL.

Sorry, doom-and-gloomers, you'll be waiting a long time for your much-cherished 5th place finish.

I understand the purpose of fandom is to have something to cheer about, and the negativity on this thread can kindof interfere with that. That said, there are many, many reasons to consider the negative predictions as realistic (as well as many to feel more optimism). This shouldn't need saying, but we 'doom and gloomers' don't want losing teams any more than the optimists. We just look at the roster, the franchise's track record, the reality of the AL East, and the current GM, and can't see anything short of catching lightning in a bottle that will help us reach the post season.

Despite the challenges, this has been a great season to follow the Jays. If I'm wrong about next year, and we do contend, I will be one happy dude. And the beautiful thing about baseball is that stranger have happened ...

robertdudek - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 11:41 AM EDT (#202808) #

Of course, anything can happen. But if you had to rank all the AL teams 1 to 14 next year based on their chances of making the playoffs, where would the Jays rank?

I would rank Baltimore ahead of them, and perhaps only Cleveland behind them.

I welcome anyone who thinks the Jays have a better chance to make the playoffs next year than the Orioles to compare the current composition of their respective major league and minor league rosters in a fair way (i.e. not as a Jays fan).

Mick Doherty - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 12:23 PM EDT (#202810) #

Long Dark Teatime of the Soul Approaches
For all the (frankly, well-placed) doom and gloom of this story and its ensuing thread, anyone who can appropriate the title of a Douglas Adams book -- even when it's not one of his top five or six works -- into the headline deserves props and kudos.

Props and kudos, Sir Robert!

cybercavalier - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 12:56 PM EDT (#202811) #

But offenseively? Pitching prospects have arguable dragged our minor league system up from the bottom of the pack into the middle (and please, feel free to point me to an outside observer who thinks we are better than that - but i think middle of the pick is being generous). However, nearly all of our significant positional prospects this year have stalled or struggled. With the big club, Scutaro's great - but this season reeks of career year, and Rolen is, while a fabulous comeback story, obviously in the decline phase of his career at an old 34. Hill is having a great year, but is not a 'potential MVP' in anything but a career year sense of the term. You say that Rios need and Wells need to be 'at the bottom of the order or gone' as if anyone would take Wells' contract, or give value back in exchange for Rios. And you don't even mention the possiblity that Halladay leaves as a free agent, which given JPs disinclination to trade vets for prospects, seems the likely outcome to me.

We can count on a good - not excellent - pitching staff next year, and an offense about the same if we get more from Snider, Rios and Wells (likely) and less from two or three of Hill, Rolen, Scutaro and Lind - with Snider being a true wildcard. Dopirack also seems like he might be able to make an impact next year, but none of the other hitting prospects seem ready to contribute. Overall, in my mind, this means third place at best. Even if one of the Yanks, Rays or Sox slips, we still have to beat the rest of the AL.

Can we find any Jack Custs in the minor league ? that is, economical solutions for certain aspects of the offense (power, hits, batting discipline). Scutaro has been one this season with his on-base ability to complement our young core of hitters in Hill, Lind and others.

Magpie - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 01:26 PM EDT (#202812) #

If Oakland is the happy outcome, kill me now. Ten games under .500 in the AL West, three years running? That's a long way to fall.

Ozzieball - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 01:39 PM EDT (#202813) #

Every year there are dozens of guys who emerge as Romero has this year. David Purcey did last year.

Well when you consider pitching well as a sign that a player is going to be bad there isn't much room for optimism is there? Romero was considered a good #2 with #1 upside when he was drafted (and his ceiling was immediately reestablished as that once his fastball returned to 90-94), and Cecil has been a #2 with #1 upside for the past year and a half. Purcey meanwhile has always been back-of-the-rotation at best and has spent the last two years being projected as a middle reliever. Not only are they not in the same category, these three pitchers have never remotely been in the same category.

Gerry - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 01:45 PM EDT (#202814) #

It's hard to disagree with the main thrust of your argument Robert. I agree that JP is not a terrible GM, he has his strengths and weaknesses like his players. The Jays could win, as the White Sox did several years ago, on the back of several career years, a few surprise rookies, and few injuries. Those seasons are rare.

And while the Jays have a number of tradable chips, other than Halladay none will bring a premium return. The Jays have a lot of overall average players, good offense and weak defense, or average in both, who will not bring a great return.

Also while Rogers are to be credited with buying the Jays when no-one else wanted to, they will run the Jays like the corporate subsidiary they are, try to break-even and lever the cross-marketing opportunities. But that creates another dilemma, a badly losing team is not good for TV ratings, so while blowing up and suffering for a few years might work for the baseball side of the business, it won't work for the TV side. So the Jays will tick along within 5 or 6 games of .500 for years to come.

The fans are essentially sitting on a lottery ticket, one day the stars will align and the Jays will make the playoffs. The odds are better than 6/49 but not good enough to count on.

Jays2010 - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 02:13 PM EDT (#202815) #

I don't really see the point of this article; as others have said, nothing new is being said. The Jays need quite a few things to go right to contend in 2010; that is the reality of the AL East every year. But the 2010 team should be better than the 2008 team and the 2008 team was good enough to make the playoffs; unless you believe all the "intangible" and "character" fluff, the Jays simply had a ton of bad luck and could not match their run differential in 2008.

Now, I think it's fair to say that even though the 2010 team should be as good or better than the 2008 team, the competition in the division from the other 4 teams is going to be stronger than in 2008. If the team remains the exact same with Snider coming in to fill the DH role and a healthy midrotation Marcum, I'd put their playoff chances at maybe 10%. Mind you, it will be one of the top 10 teams in all of baseball...such is life in the AL East when you don't have unlimited resources or the luxury of sucking for years and reaping the rewards of high draft picks and selling off players to sacrifice wins...attendance be damned...

Glevin - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 02:19 PM EDT (#202816) #

A good post. I am more down on J.P. than you are though because I think he has pursued a strategy that was never ever going to work in this division. The only way the Jays are ever going to compete is build up a deep system. That means money for scouting, development, and signing Latin players. Spending tonnes of money non-elite free agents (especially closers, don't spend anything on them!)and re-signing your own non-elite players to massive contracts is not going to win you anything The Jays simply have not been good enough to compete for years and I don't see any other option than to dismantle the team and try to build up a top system. It will be hard to ever compete while Wells is around as he eats up an enormous percentage of the teams salary. The Wells contract might be the single worst move in the history of the Blue Jays. (Ryan's contract is not too far off either) I think a 5-year rebuilding plan is realistic. Snider would be entering his prime, Lind still in his, some of the Jays prospects now would be contributing, and the Jays would have five years of draft-picks that hopefully could make a big difference. Anyone who would not be a major contributer at that point should be traded in the next few years. (you don't have to dump everyone at once). The only other option is to pretend a handful of good starts from young Jays pitchers mean that they will all be aces next year and hope that every single player has an amazing year. In other words, there is no other option. This team is not going to compete in the next few years. The core simply is not nearly good enough.

So, what to do. J.P. needs to go. Maybe he could be a fit for another team, but he's far too cautious to be a top GM in this league. In order to win, unless you are the Yankees or Red Sox, you have to take an occasional (intelligent) risk in trades and drafting. (And not taking risks with good, not great players in long-term contracts) Unfortunately, the Jays do not have much to trade of value. Halladay obviously has a tonne of value, Hill has a lot, and Rolen and Downs have some but after that, the pickings are pretty slim. I don't think it is pessimism to see the team the way Robert does, I think it is realism. As a fan you can be optimistic, but a GM needs to see his talent for what it is.

Jim - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 02:29 PM EDT (#202817) #

Robert Dudek has been ghost around here, but he's wrong about one thing. Oakland will never quite bottom out like this team needs to.

It's going to be ugly baseball for the next half decade, it will take a miracle to change that.

Jim - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 02:36 PM EDT (#202818) #

RD has also erred on the side of positive in the past.

The reality is that this team might be in the worst shape of all 30 franchises. Washington is terrible, but has Strasburg and Harper to look forward to. Pittsburgh stinks but has the NL Central to catch and at least is selling parts off.

San Diego is in a similar spot, but at least they have new ownership.

The divisional setup is grossly unfair for 3 teams. The Rays and O's have paid their dues with 65 win seasons.. .that is the only way to get back in the race. Be so bad for so long you can collect talent to make a 3-4 year run at the well-heeled teams. Sitting in this 79-85 win corridor in the AL East is the Death Valley of MLB.

Glevin - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 02:37 PM EDT (#202819) #

"But the 2010 team should be better than the 2008 team and the 2008 team was good enough to make the playoffs; unless you believe all the "intangible" and "character" fluff, the Jays simply had a ton of bad luck and could not match their run differential in 2008."

One of the problems I have here is that I don't think run differential equals real talent. In fact, I am sure it doesn't. There are a bunch of other factors involved in run differential. The Jays had one hitter with 20 HRs last year and he just got 20. Their second best starter was Jesse Litsch. That's not a team that is going to contend for a World Series.

"such is life in the AL East when you don't have unlimited resources or the luxury of sucking for years and reaping the rewards of high draft picks and selling off players to sacrifice wins."

I think the "sucking for years" for Tampa is overrated. Sure, it helped to get Longoria and Upton high, but they also made some great moves. They traded Delmon Young for Garza and Bartlett. That's not about Young being a top pick, that's about identifying a prospect other teams love that you realise is overrated. When was the last time the Jays made a trade that good? When was the last time they picked up someone like Carlos Pena who was incredibly talented but other teams didn't want? They got Zobrist for Huff when Huff was going to be a free agent. And so on...Yeah, they got high picks, but that is only part of their team. Baltimore has rebuilt its future mostly through one incredible trade. The jays have to stop this "woe is us" stuff. Yeah, it sucks to be in the AL East, but you have to try to win there anyway.

cybercavalier - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 02:38 PM EDT (#202820) #

The only way the Jays are ever going to compete is build up a deep system.

http://www.nysun.com/sports/shrewd-craft-of-building-depth/54545/

Does this article relevant to our topic here? The Red Sox and the Athletics derived their ways in building depth, can the Jays do the same? At any rate, I agree with Glevin.

Ryan Day - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 03:00 PM EDT (#202821) #

They traded Delmon Young for Garza and Bartlett. That's not about Young being a top pick, that's about identifying a prospect other teams love that you realise is overrated.

Of course it's about Young being a top pick. Garza was also a first-round pick - it's not like the Jays could have traded Reed Johnson for him. It turned out to be a fantastic trade, but it was also one with very unique circumstances.

Mike Green - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 04:00 PM EDT (#202823) #

I agree that 2011-2014 looks very dark. A wise new owner might reasonably decide however that it makes sense to go for it in 2010. A rotation of Halladay, Cecil, Marcum, Romero, Rzepczynski with a bullpen including Frasor, Downs, League, Carlson, Richmond and Janssen, a lineup of Wells, Rios and Snider in the outfield, Rolen, Hill and Overbay in the infield and Arencibia as a platoon catcher lacks a shortstop, a LH catcher and a couple of bench players. If you are going to do that, you really ought to go for it, as the Marlins did when they did have the opportunity.

When the team opened this season 27-14 and Snider was struggling and Hill/Scutaro were getting no rest at all, there was an opportunity for wise ownership to realize that an investment for an outfielder/DH and a backup infielder might pay dividends in increased attendance in the summer. One senses that the uncertain ownership status has played a significant role in the team's decline since then.

Mike Green - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 04:03 PM EDT (#202824) #

And, welcome back, Robert, to the Batter's Box writer's chair.

Alex Obal - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 04:07 PM EDT (#202825) #

Robert, is it fair to say that the point of this article (aside from to be provocative) is that you'd prefer the trade-everyone scenario to the slow-descent scenario? You never made that explicit. But if the root of the problem is in fact that the Jays need to match either New York and Boston's financial resources or what you perceive as Baltimore and Tampa's superior young talent, as they currently do not, clearly in the absence of a Steinbrenner-type owner they should do everything in their power to go for the young talent as fast as they can?

I think you're underrating the pitching prospects (in particular, implying that Romero and Cecil are back-end rotation types and saying Marc Rzepczynski 'relies on defense' is a bit overzealous), as well as the ability of the Jays' coaching staff to realize their potential. Brad Arnsberg's track record is impressive. However, I agree that the AL East is going to be absurdly tough next year as the O's and Rays continue to improve, and that it may not even produce the wild card team if the Jays try to contend. If the return the Jays could get from a fire sale appears to put them in a significantly advantageous position three years down the road, they should seriously consider it.

If Rogers' primary goal really is to make sure they are within 7-8 games of the wild card at the ASB every year, that's awful. It makes you wonder if the Jays could blow their current core up and still satisfy Rogers' need for a 'competitive' team by building two or three 78-win teams by patching their holes with pitching prospects and cheap all-glove-no-bat types even if they traded Halladay, Rolen, Rios, Overbay, etc. (and let Scutaro walk) for a ton of hitting prospects none of whom are remotely close to the majors. That would probably be a tough sell. But Hill, Lind and Snider isn't a terrible place to start.

If Baltimore offered Tillman, Matusz and Arrieta for Cecil, Romero and Rzepczynski straight up, would you take that deal?

greenfrog - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 04:16 PM EDT (#202827) #

I think the Jays could reposition the team nicely if they stay focused on building around Romero, Cecil, Hill, Lind and Snider *and* are willing to invest in the club over the next five years. If Rogers goes cheap and caps the payroll at about $70-90M each year, I don't see a lot of exciting things happening--it will just be more of the same in a few years. In order to get the team oriented in the right direction, they need to do a few things:

- Accept that the team needs to take a step back before it can move forward
- Trade Doc for a prospect package focused on quality, not quantity. At least two of Drabek, Brown and Taylor (ideally all three) plus a couple of high-upside flyers would be a reasonable return. Or Kershaw plus prospects.
- Explore the trade market for Rolen, Frasor, Overbay and Downs with a view to finding some high-upside talent (not filler like Fabio Castro)
- Let Scutaro walk and take the two high draft picks (assuming he remains a Type A FA)
- Continue to invest in scouting and the draft (including strategically going over slot at times) and in international markets
- Focus on Longoria/Utley-type contracts for their young stars in lieu of hefty contracts to stars on the verge of hitting the free agent market (like Wells, whose first five-year deal was actually very reasonable, but whose monster backloaded deal threatens to wreck the team's chances in the short- to medium-term)
- Find a first-rate president to run the front office

I think the front office needs to stop the insanity of trying to placate fans with the big contracts, and stop clinging to the illusion that the current team can compete in the AL East in the short term.

TamRa - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 04:27 PM EDT (#202828) #

I don't have time right now to review the whole thread but I disagree with the premise that the Orioles (especially) and the Rays have a noteably better young core than the Jays do. Perhaps marginally, but not enough to make a conclusive definitive judgement.

IMO, the future comes down to two things -

A. what direction ownership/management chooses. Shall we be the AL version of the Marlins, trying to cobble together a very inexpensive team that doesn't come off as a complete 100 loss embarrassment? or shall we pour some money into keeping the better players together? this applies whether it's Rogers in control or the team is sold. If you can't predict that - and no one can - then you can't reasonably project how the next five years or so will play out.

B. Luck. ANY team in this division who's not Boston or NY will nead a heaping helping of luck to make the playoffs. the Rays got that last year (I'm not saying they suck...I'm saying at their core they are a 85-90 win team and that isn't enough in the ALE without luck) and the O's might get it next year (though my guess is it's going to take a year or two longer than that for the good pitching prospects to make an impact)

BUT

The Jays might get it next year too. Just because we have been terminally unlucky the last 3-4 years (and we have) is NO indication the dice won't fall our way in 2010. That, of course, is kind of a weak principle to build your hopes on, but the reality is that for all three of the "other" ALE teams, you are not going to make the playoffs with out catching a LOT of breaks.

that's simply the world we live in.

Jays2010 - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 04:35 PM EDT (#202829) #

They traded Delmon Young for Garza and Bartlett. That's not about Young being a top pick

Really?

When was the last time they picked up someone like Carlos Pena who was incredibly talented but other teams didn't want?

The Jays haven't had the roster space available to take a flier on someone like Pena. That's what happens when you have a solid team without too many holes. The Red Sox and Yankees didn't extract anything from their Pena experiments either because they were not in the position to wait around like the Rays. The Rays have done some very good things, but to act like they could have done this without losing for 10 years, accumulating high picks, selling off players and sacrificing wins every year (which also gets higher draft picks) is way off. To date, they have Crawford and Shields as their 'skillful' draft selections (i.e. not a top 5 pick) playing for their team. Garza and Bartlett would not have been acquired without the alleged ceiling of a first overall pick. The Rays are an amalgam of high draft picks, scrapheap acquisitions (only made possible by having unlimited roster spots every yr - and, common, a ton of luck as well) and the fruits of selling off players for ten seasons - not the result of drafting well...it's not like they have never failed with a high pick (Brazelton, Hamilton), but when you have 10 years of them, you can afford failures.

Look, obviously it is now evident that the Jays can't keep going in 'tweener' mode if they want to have a consistent shot at the playoffs in the AL East. But, for example, if the Jays were simply willing to eat whatever it takes to get rid of Wells (I would hope he can play well enough for the Jays to only eat half of the deal), sign the best available slugger to take his spot in the order (Dye?) and have Snider produce at a reasonable clip next year, I'd say the Jays would be right there in the battle for a playoff spot. What's that, like $110-$120 mill in 2010?

This should be a very solid team in 2010 even though, I agree, they are a long shot to be in contention without a payroll spike.

If Baltimore offered Tillman, Matusz and Arrieta for Cecil, Romero and Rzepczynski straight up, would you take that deal?

How 'bout Chamberlain, Hughes, Kennedy? Let's see what these guys do in the majors before acting like Baltimore will have a stacked rotation for years. It doesn't really matter that (if I remember correctly) Marcum never made a BA top 100 list, Romero once after being drafted (and in the lower quarter), Cecil once (in the lower half) and Rzcepsynski has never made it...if they do well in the majors.

Rzepczynski and Richmond are soft-tossers who rely on the defense.

Rzepczynski may have a better strikeout/9 inning rate and GB/FB rate than Roy Halladay...not saying he will be anywhere near as good...but one could argue that Halladay relies too much on his defence too...

And, hey, if the Jays do what Baltimore does and receive a ton of talent back for Halladay...I don't see them in better shape than the Jays going forward...not until they develop some pitching.

China fan - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 05:07 PM EDT (#202830) #

Robert, I'm happy to accept your wager. End of September: Jays will be ahead of Baltimore. Winner gets a cuttlefish. (Although I noticed the lawyerly use of the conditional in your prediction -- the Orioles "may" be ahead of the Jays by the end of September. So I'm not sure if you're actually willing to make this bet or not. But if you are, I accept the challenge. I say the Jays will be ahead of Orioles.)

Alex Obal - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 05:20 PM EDT (#202831) #

Or the Jays could be mathematically eliminated from contention for fourth before October 1.

Dewey - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 07:03 PM EDT (#202832) #

Uh oh, the Eeyores have got out. Monty Python wrote about this sort of exquisite doom-saying in their sketch, The Four Yorkshiremen. Are you from Yorkshire, Jim? Robert's excuse is that he's of cheery Polish extraction.

An excerpt follows:

FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
   Cardboard box?
THIRD YORKSHIREMAN:
   Aye.
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
   You were lucky. We lived for three months in a paper bag in a septic tank. We used to have to get up at six in the morning, clean the paper bag, eat a crust of stale bread, go to work down t' mill, fourteen hours a day, week-in week-out, for sixpence a week, and when we got home our Dad would thrash us to sleep wi' his belt.
SECOND YORKSHIREMAN:
   Luxury. We used to have to get out of the lake at six o'clock in the morning, clean the lake, eat a handful of 'ot gravel, work twenty hour day at mill for tuppence a month, come home, and Dad would thrash us to sleep with a broken bottle, if we were lucky!
THIRD YORKSHIREMAN:
   Well, of course, we had it tough. We used to 'ave to get up out of shoebox at twelve o'clock at night and lick road clean wit' tongue. We had two bits of cold gravel, worked twenty-four hours a day at mill for sixpence every four years, and when we got home our Dad would slice us in two wit' bread knife.
FOURTH YORKSHIREMAN:
   Right. I had to get up in the morning at ten o'clock at night half an hour before I went to bed, drink a cup of sulphuric acid, work twenty-nine hours a day down mill, and pay mill owner for permission to come to work, and when we got home, our Dad and our mother would kill us and dance about on our graves singing Hallelujah.
FIRST YORKSHIREMAN:
   And you try and tell the young people of today that ..... they won't *believe* you.
ALL:
   They won't!

Mylegacy - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 08:05 PM EDT (#202833) #

I've taken my fine time getting into this thread.

IF - we kept Roy and resigned Scutaro I STILL think we'd be serious contenders in 2010. This team does NOT need to be broken up. Next year we'll have more healthy - major league caliber pitching - than any team in the history of Wales and Scotland combined.

SO - WHAT'S CHANGED?

Ownership - has clearly sent the message to JP to EITHER dump salary now or has told JP that we'll have to cut in 2010 (more likely) - JP knowing this and having promised to be up front with the Franchise - has told Doc that we won't be able to make the changes we need this winter to GUARANTEE a shot in 2010. Accordingly, Doc has agreed to have the team shop him.

If I'm right you'll see Rolen being shopped too and no real offer made to Scutaro. Pity - bloody shame really - the economy craters just when Rogers loses Ted Rogers and the "suits" and "bean counters" come out of their slime pits.

Pity - bloody shame.

Hodgie - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 08:05 PM EDT (#202834) #

".......Rzepczynski and Richmond are soft-tossers who rely on the defense."

While I don't exactly agree that the sky is falling and find the tone a bit melo-dramatic, I am not inclined to argue the point or even contend that others are not entitled that view if they see fit. I am however left to wonder though if Mr. Dudek is a hard man to impress after characterizing Zep as a soft-tosser who relies on his defense. Yes, in his minor league career he has been an extreme groundball pitcher (64.4%) but let us also look at some other numbers as well...

Pop up rate - 7.4%

Line drive rate - 12.7%

Fly ball rate - 20.2%

K/9 - 9.8

In my mind, a lefty who throws 88-92 MPH sinkers (according to scouting reports), with very low line drive and fly ball rates and high pop-up and strike out rates isn't someone I would label as a soft-tossing, defence reliant individual.

greenfrog - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 08:23 PM EDT (#202835) #

Doc's tactful but honest comments about the team's near-term future and his desire to play for a winner probably says more than any fan or media analysis of the team's playoff chances in 2010.

Magpie - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 08:41 PM EDT (#202836) #

Rzepczynski and Richmond are soft-tossers who rely on the defense.

Hang on, hang on... Richmond's a soft tosser? Since when was a 91 mph fastball soft? And as for defending on his defense, all pitchers do, but seeing as how Richmond's struck out 91 batters in 112 major league innings let's just say he doesn't depend on it quite as often as most other guys.

And who gives a damn, anyway? What are the standards here? Richmond throws much harder than Marcum - what does that make Shaun? A Very soft tosser? So what? Should we take him out back and shoot him? He's still a better pitcher than Dustin McGowan.

It doesn't matter how you miss the bats, as long as you do.

Dave Till - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 09:28 PM EDT (#202837) #

I share Robert's lack of optimism.

The question I have had all along: to what extent is player development merely luck? Can a smart GM do a better job of drafting talent, and can a good organization do a better job of developing it?

Should J.P. have done better, or has he just been unlucky?

Dewey - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 09:57 PM EDT (#202838) #

Can a smart GM do a better job of drafting talent, and can a good organization do a better job of developing it?

Should J.P. have done better, or has he just been unlucky?

More money, lots more of it, would make JP much "smarter" and improve the organization's player development. It would even make them luckier.

robertdudek - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 10:01 PM EDT (#202839) #

A few points:

There are a few key factors that underpin my argument:

1) The AL East is the toughest division in baseball right now. I'd be singing a different tune in the AL Central and advocating a different blueprint.

2) Rogers will reduce payroll RELATIVE TO THE LEAGUE for the foreseeable future. This means that bringing in established talent to fill holes is not going to be a viable option. Bringing in guys like Zaun or Scutaro on the cheap is going to ensure that the team is not terrible, ASSUMING JP CAN KEEP DOING IT (more likely he just got lucky with these guys).

3) The Jays offense is old. There are only a few ways to offset the decline that is inevitable for an old offense. One is to develop farm players to fill the gaps. We have Lind and Snider, but both are defensive liabilities and so will weaken the defense. Arencibia? Let's just say that the fact that Myers and Borders are the only two catchers of any significance this team's far, system has EVER produced does not fill me with optimism. A second way is to bring in veteran talent (see point 2). A third way is to make some brilliant trades - I'm not holding my breath here because I have yet to see JP make one. Is there a fourth way? Maybe, but I'd like to know what it is.

The pitchers:

1) 91 mph is a below average MLB fastball now (for a righthander). Richmond is a servicable starter, but it is very unlikely to become an ace. Rzepczynski is still raw, doesn't throw hard and for every lefthander like him that becomes Mark Buerhle there are probably 15 that either never make it, get hurt or become back of the rotation fodder. Counting on him for anything just shows how desperate Jays fans are. The starting rotation has been patched together with duct tape this year - imagine how difficult that will be when Doc is gone. Cecil has been the highest rated prospect and he looks like he's going to have a good career as a grounball pitcher, but again that is if everything goes right.

It amazes me how fans overrate their own team's prospects. Sickels, Baseball America or anyone else that ranks prospects have not ranked the Jays prospects highly as a group. Romero wasn't even on the radar anymore before spring training , what makes you think he won't turn back into a pumpkin just because he's had a good half season? The Jays had the fewest B- and better rated prospects by Sickels of any AL EAST team. Two were Snider and Cecil. The other four have all taken a step back. It is almost certain that with Cecil, Snider, Romero and probably Rzep losing official prospect status this year, the Blue Jays farrm system will be rated at or near the bottom of all of MLB.

So what is the cause for optimism. What we have here is:

1) Old offense
2) Salary will be trimmed
3) Weak farm system
4) Tough division

This year I thought that winning 80 games would be a heck of an accomplishment. Next year, if we do not have Doc, Scutaro, Barajas and Rolen, winning 75 will be an achievement. Over the next two years (averaging) , I think they are more likely to lose 92+ than win 85+. After that it will probably get worse.

I guess the point of my little essay is to try to stamp out false optimism so that the coming pain is somehow more bearable.

As for which I would prefer - the slow decline or the blowing up the team - I'm not sure. I would think that, looking at the team in 4 years, it would be better if there were more good young ballplayers in the organisation than less. To achieve that you're going to have to trade veterans for prospects and getting higher draft picks will help too. But then there will be the pain of the next 4 years to deal with and that will adversely affect revenue.

Geoff - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 10:08 PM EDT (#202840) #

I'm part Yorkshire, so I'm glad to point out that today we have modern conveniences like YouTube where you can share the magic of live performances with the young people of today without having to rely on their reading comprehension. Back in my day, you had to walk twenty miles to a library and spend three hours to find a book with an excerpt like the one Dewey provided. Then if you giggled, an old lady would come by and slap you. If you did it again you were put in the gallows. Try and tell young people of today how tough simple entertainment was to come by....

John Northey - Saturday, July 18 2009 @ 11:15 PM EDT (#202842) #

Well, guess it is time to become a fan of some other sport or pick a different team which isn't in the AL East or of Boston or New York.

I do find it funny how depressed people get about this. The Jays have used 5 pitchers under 25 as starters (plus Ray who is 25). Two have ERA+'s over 130 (Zep has a 2.50 ERA now, Romero 3.25) and while I don't expect that to continue they at least have shown they could be big league starting pitchers for the #3-5 holes and we have Halladay & Marcum for the #1/2 slots (assuming no trades and given JP's history a trade is stil unlikely) along with Richmond (114 ERA+ over 112 lifetime innings 7.3 K/9 and 2.6 BB/9) and Cecil and Ray and Litsch and whoever else is around. Tommy John surgery is fairly common now so expecting Marcum to be solid in 2010 isn't that big a stretch, and Litsch for late 2010 or 2011 also isn't.

As for Tampa, going two years in a row using just 6 starters each time (3+ starts) seems to be luck at an amazing level or they have a trainer who should be making $10+ million a year.

The lineup? Hill, Rios, Snider, Lind are under 30 thus have prime years left and any could have a career year or two any season. Wells is 30 and has a year or two left where recovery is common (wouldn't bet on it, and like all others feared that contract from the start). Catcher is always a nightmare to develop, but servicable bargin bin ones have always been around and found by all Jays GM's. Short and third are the positions that scare me post 2010 the most. Getting a servicable defense first guy for short should be easy (tons are free agents this winter) but a solid guy to replace Rolen? Bautista is 28 and the best available replacment but a 100 OPS+ is about all I'd every hope for from him with poor defense. So we have 4 guys who should be acceptable at least and all-star's when playing as well as we'd hope for. The other 5... hrm.

I'm an optimist and hope things break right. If you like being depressed the Leafs always accept new fans :)

TamRa - Sunday, July 19 2009 @ 12:02 AM EDT (#202843) #

I think the "sucking for years" for Tampa is overrated. Sure, it helped to get Longoria and Upton high, but they also made some great moves. They traded Delmon Young for Garza and Bartlett. That's not about Young being a top pick, that's about identifying a prospect other teams love that you realise is overrated.

So they wasted a high draft pick on a guy they knew was over-rated? And really, why does everyone suddenly mention Bartlett in these conversations. He's been an invisible bat his whole career and all of a sudden the Bizzaro-world Bartlett shows up and looks like George Brett or something - please don't tell me the rays knew that would happen.

When was the last time the Jays made a trade that good?

The last time they traded a highly touted young player who busted for the other team? or the last time they acuquired a guy who was a huge help to their own squad? does a deal HAVE to feature both in order to be "that good"?

When was the last time they picked up someone like Carlos Pena who was incredibly talented but other teams didn't want?

IF he was "incredibly talented" why did other teams not want him? in fact, how could he have been signed...LATE in the offseason...on a minor league deal? Why, in fact, did the Rays first sign Hee Sop Choi in the same off-season if they were so good at spotting talent?

And the answer to your question is - Scott Downs.

They got Zobrist for Huff when Huff was going to be a free agent. And so on...

Yet another player no one expected to ever be this good even once. Bartlett, Pena, Zobrist - largely luck. The same sort of luck the Jays got in Downs, Carlson, Scutaro, Inglett last year, and others.

I actually do credit the Rays for making a good deal in the Garza trade, it's a good clean baseball deal which worked out real well for them (even though it is true you can't make that deal if you don't suck enough to get to draft DY)
But there's no way that Pena and Zobrist show any more savvy in terms of scrap heap mongering than the Jays showed via Downs and Scutaro. And no, Downs doesnt have to be as impactful as Pena for the analogy to hold.

brent - Sunday, July 19 2009 @ 01:13 AM EDT (#202844) #

Robertdudek, all of those rankings rate very heavy on ceiling. What they actually do at the MLB level is far more important, and anyone doing those lists will tell you that.

Thomas - Sunday, July 19 2009 @ 02:42 AM EDT (#202848) #

This is unanswerable without knowing the return of the (seemingly inevitable) possible Halladay trade. With Halladay and assuming a reasonable return to effectiveness by Marcum I'd take Toronto, while acknowledging Baltimore's minor league talent that is creeping closer and closer to the majors. And I'd certainly rank KC behind them, as well.

Don't forget fans. Things can always get worse. We could be trading for a grade B pitching prospect and another prospect for Yuniesky Betancourt.

Jays2010 - Sunday, July 19 2009 @ 02:43 AM EDT (#202849) #

Robertdudek, all of those rankings rate very heavy on ceiling. What they actually do at the MLB level is far more important, and anyone doing those lists will tell you that.

I absolutely disagree with this. Ian Kennedy has been on a BA top 100 list...has Marcum? Clearly how BA and others value a player is worth more than what a player does in the major leagues...

2002: Crawford/Brazelton/Hamilton

2003: McClung/Brazelton/Hamilton/Upton/Baldelli

2004: Gathright/Upton/Young

2005: Gathright/Niemann/Kazmir/Young

2006: Hammel/Niemann/Young

2007: Davis/Dukes/Mcgee/Niemann/Brignac/Longoria/Young

2008: Niemann/Jennings/Brignac/Davis/McGee/Longoria

At a quick glance (I may have missed someone), these are the Rays in BA's top 100 from 2002-2008. First off, Young was the Rays highest prospect for 4 straight years...I don't think it's a coincidence that the Rays got Garza for him (clearly it was because of the cache that comes with being a high pick...but I guess this can't be proven).

The Rays really haven't developed any of these players other than their high picks and Crawford. And this is why everyone considers the Rays to be great at "developing" players...lists like this (Shields never registered on a list...hence Ian Kennedy is worth more than him as well....they did flip Gathright for a useful player so I'll give them some credit for that). Well maybe when Brignac becomes a better ML player than Aaron Hill (who was on the lower part of a couple of BA rankings). Maybe when they actually develop players other than high draft picks this can be said - and certainly some of the players on the list from the last couple of years stand a good chance of making a contribution - but until then...yah right...

robertdudek - Sunday, July 19 2009 @ 03:00 AM EDT (#202850) #

Toronto has more talent than KC, but KC plays in a much weaker divison - hence they have a better shot at the playoffs next year than the Jays.

To me, unless a starting pitcher has at least two solid years in MLB without being injured, he can't be counted on for anything. He's just as speculative as a prospect in the high minors.

And yes I think Arrieta, Tillman and Matusz as a group are better than Cecil, Romero and Rzepczynski. They have a higher ceiling and a greater chance of average success in the long term.

Dave Till - Sunday, July 19 2009 @ 07:24 AM EDT (#202852) #

To me, unless a starting pitcher has at least two solid years in MLB without being injured, he can't be counted on for anything. He's just as speculative as a prospect in the high minors.

I wouldn't go quite that far. The way I see it: a pitching prospect needs to clear two huge hurdles to become a reliable starter: he has to have command of at least two or three major-league quality pitches, and he has to be durable enough to handle a major league starter's workload.

Some people underestimate the importance of the second hurdle, but I would say that Romero has pretty much cleared the first one. Pitchers in the high minors haven't cleared either.

I would also add that the Jays' good team defense helps make all of the Jays' pitching prospects look good. If team D can save a hit a game, it will show up all over the pitching stats.

lexomatic - Sunday, July 19 2009 @ 09:40 AM EDT (#202856) #

And no, Downs doesnt have to be as impactful as Pena for the analogy to hold

Who wants to make a data table?
Seriously.
I like thinking about how awesome Downs has been since he shifted permanently to the bullpen. I doubt there have been more than a handful (except in saves) - Mariano, Papelbon, Nathan? How many more?

since 2005....

10-6 243gp 2.40era 16 sv 243.2ip 188h 70r 65er 18hr 89bb 210k

2-1 49 2.40 3 49 38 14 13 4 18 42 average year 05-09

0-0 13 4.32 25 22 12 12 9 15 5hr 2005

5-1 54 2.78 61.2 44 21 19 24 51 6hr 2006

5-5 176 1.94 158 123 37 34 56 145 7hr 2007-9

Forkball - Sunday, July 19 2009 @ 09:53 AM EDT (#202858) #

It's been a good year since there's been seen such bold talk, and that didn't seem to end well.

grjas - Sunday, July 19 2009 @ 10:51 AM EDT (#202866) #

It would be a crying shame if the Jays were to jettison Halladay now for young prospects, and start another rebuilding program. Like it or not, with the absurd spending levels of the Yankees and the Red Sox and the "genius" of mismatched schedules, all the stars must align for any AL East team other than Boston or NY to advance. Let's face it- In the last 10 years, one AL East team other than Boston or NY- last year's TB Rays- has advanced.

30 chances. One team.

Clearly, in this division, when you have even a small chance of winning, go for it, as you may not get another.

In 2008 we had a small chance to win, until our DH imploded and second baseman concussed. In 2009 we had a small chance to win until injuries to 8 starters and 2 closers did us in. With Halladay and some healthy pitching, in 2010 we will have a small chance to win.

The alternative is bleak. With no Halladay and the anchor of Wells and Rios contracts, a rebuilding team is years away from even having even that small chance to win. Let's take one last shot while we have a bullet or two in the rifle.

I am tired of 16 years without one meaningful game in September.

Thomas - Sunday, July 19 2009 @ 11:10 AM EDT (#202867) #

Toronto has more talent than KC, but KC plays in a much weaker divison - hence they have a better shot at the playoffs next year than the Jays.

I understand the reasoning. I just disagree. I don't see any a team with two good starters and two good hitters makes the playoffs next year, even in a weak division. Certainly not a team that thinks it's a good idea to acquire Betancourt and Mike Jacobs.

CeeBee - Sunday, July 19 2009 @ 11:28 AM EDT (#202869) #

I'd love to see a more balanced/ no interleague schedule and 2 divisions. 8 teams make the playoffs, top 3 in each division and 2 wildcards. Do an NHL/NBA style playoffs and IMO it's a win/win situation. I've been following baseball since the late 50's and it's about time baseball changes with the times. Look at the excitement the "second" season generates in all the other North American pro sports with even small market cities at least having some chance at the post season no matter what the division or conference. I could even live with the playoffs as is, if they got rid of the unbalanced schedule and the divisional setup. It also wouldn't hurt to have both leagues either use the DH or not use the DH though my preference would be for both to use it. Thats my fantasy and may I live long enough to see it or something along those lines anyway. :)

Dewey - Sunday, July 19 2009 @ 11:37 AM EDT (#202870) #

Jim - Sunday, July 19 2009 @ 11:45 AM EDT (#202871) #

I think between Kansas City and Toronto you are debating the difference between 1.0% and 0.5%.

I'm all for 2 divisions of 8 teams in each league (obviously you'd need 2 more teams) and the division winners and 2 Wild Cards per league but 8 teams making the playoffs out of 14 in the American League would ruin baseball.

The playoffs are already annoying in the sense that what is effective for 162 games and is the truest test of baseball goes out the window with all the offdays and 3 man rotations. The last thing we need is Seattle taking out Boston in a 5 game series because King Felix can start twice. It makes the entirety of the season worthless.

The Major League regular season is much more popular then the NBA or NHL playoffs in the US.

lexomatic - Sunday, July 19 2009 @ 05:27 PM EDT (#202883) #

Arencibia? Let's just say that the fact that Myers and Borders are the only two catchers of any significance this team's far, system has EVER produced does not fill me with optimism. i think at the moment its looking like a bit of a mistake not sending JPA back to AA with the message "you're going up soon (unless your game falls apart) but right now we want you to work on seeing pitches better. blablabla selectivity" he doesn't need to have the plate discipline of a Boggs to be useful, but something like 30/90 bb/k would allow him to him 240-260 with 20 hrs. i can live with that. unless he learns the strike zone better though i don't seem him hitting enough to be a viable backup.

Alex Obal - Monday, July 20 2009 @ 06:20 PM EDT (#202950) #

Your 2010 Blue Jays:

C Chavez + Barrett, first prospect to appear ready gets called up immediately
1B Mientkiewicz + Ruiz/Dopirak
2B Hill
SS Tony Pena Jr. (*ducks* okay maybe not him, but that idea)
3B Inglett + Bautista (you'd actually probably non-tender Bautista, but I'm a fan, so whatever)
LF Wells
CF whoever (Jody Gerut? Brian Anderson? Inglett??!! Could also platoon this spot with Bautista, at the cost of putting Wells in CF occasionally)
RF Snider
DH Lind
+ an Eric Hinske-type four corners guy, to cover in case 1B or 3B is awful or someone in a corner gets hurt

SP Marcum, Romero, Cecil, Richmond, Purcey/Litsch/Tallet/schmuck veteran (could call up Zep later in the season but I'd want him to get more minor league experience if it's a rebuilding year)
RP League, Carlson, Janssen, Accardo, Tallet/Purcey, fill in blanks cheaply with starter prospects and/or brilliant JP acquisitions

Plus one or two superstud prospects, 8-12 low-level prospects with upside, two compensation picks for Scutaro, and a large quantity of cash freed up to sign tons of international prospects and go over slot repeatedly in the draft.

Uh, it's an idea. I don't know whether to cry or jump off a bridge. But if the prospects are really, really exciting, even more than the sea of comp picks in the 2011 draft - and in return for Halladay, Rolen, Downs, Rios, Overbay and Frasor it's conceivable that they might be - I'd be willing to root for this team.

Without knowing what offers are seriously being discussed for Doc, I can't have an opinion on whether it makes sense to trade him, because it's impossible to weigh the relative probabilities of (b) gaining young talent superior to what you'd get in 2011 compared to (a) contending in 2010. I think that's the big question here. People have a wide range of opinions about (a), and some feel very strongly about theirs. But nobody knows anything for sure about (b). All I know is I feel like if Roy Halladay doesn't get traded, you owe it to him to give it a shot next year.

Mike Green - Monday, July 20 2009 @ 08:40 PM EDT (#202959) #

schmuck veteran

Milt Wilcox is available, and still has a serviceable fastball at age 59. Heck, Phil Niekro's knuckles are still probably working at age 70.

If you're going to go Marlin, why not go all the way and trade Lind too? He's got substantial value and would be unaffordable and too old by 2014 or so when the club might compete. Almost as importantly, he might single-handedly cost you a chance at the first overall pick in the draft...

Alex Obal - Monday, July 20 2009 @ 11:33 PM EDT (#202976) #

Yeah, that would make sense if the payroll actually did fall to $50 million going forward for some reason. I was trying to be sensitive to Rogers' need to have a team that could be taken seriously as a dark horse contender at least through Canada Day. I don't think we are allowed to have the first overall pick in the draft. Of course, my team is not exactly menacing - the idea was basically to create a poor man's version of the Twins, hopefully with better pitching and a less star-studded offense featuring Lind, Snider and Hill as Mauer, Morneau and Torii Hunter.

I'd also anticipate increasing the payroll back to 80-90 million in a couple of years. (If Rogers doesn't want to do that, yeah, trade Lind, sure.) You can go Marlin in the short term, and then act like a normal team when it makes sense to. The payroll decrease here is just a convenient short-term side effect of (hopefully) reloading the farm system.

Alex Obal - Monday, July 20 2009 @ 11:34 PM EDT (#202977) #

And yes, there should be 50516 layers of scare quotes around contender.

vw_fan17 - Tuesday, July 21 2009 @ 05:26 PM EDT (#203008) #

I just wanted to check something - all these "whatever 3B we can scare up for '10" posts - as far as I can tell, Rolen is signed through 2010? Are you assuming we dump him for next to nothing just to clear the $$? Or am I reading wrong information?

I'd be quite sad if we got rid of Rolen - he's probably my favourite Jay (even more than Doc!). I'm REALLY hoping we hold on to him for '10.

Alex Obal - Wednesday, July 22 2009 @ 04:37 AM EDT (#203027) #

Can't speak for the Jays but I think dumping Rolen for nothing would be dumb. I think a smart front office would appreciate his defensive prowess and his emergence as a contact hitter, and the possibility of getting compensation in 2011, and be prepared to give up value for him. If I'm wrong, oh well. Keep him.

Long Dark Teatime of the Soul Approaches | 60 comments | Create New Account

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