I know this is way off topic but does anyone know the name of the (Gordon Lightfoot?) song that plays during the pregame video montage of Canadian baseball history?

Today and yesterday have me wondering... is there a team that whines more about the strike-zone in-game than the Red Sox. Closest I can think of are the Yankees (Posada in particular), but that could be over-exposure.

For all the complaining done against Zep, I only noticed 1 pitch that was a, well, iffy call. Slider to Ortiz 6 inches off the outside in the 6th inning.

Of course, that begs the question... do the Jays need to whine more?

I guess we'll mark this as a good opening post-AS series.  Is it not perfectly clear that Kevin Millar is not OK as a DH/1B for 300 PAs/season?  Is it also not perfectly clear that Alex Rios belongs in centerfield?

natan - "Summertime Dream" (h/t VBF). Also, the music in the video with the mutant blue jays swarming the Dome is "Eminence Front" by (can you believe this? I still don't) the Who. I'm no Keith Moon fanatic but holy crap it did not take them long to get awful once he disappeared. It's not a bad tune, but it doesn't exactly scream extry extry something exciting and Canadian is about to happen either.

Is Wells' recent whatever's keeping him out of the lineup an acceptable excuse to move him to a corner? What is? When JP or Cito or whoever does decide to shift Rios to center, presumably they're going to want to do it at a time when they can pretend it was in response to injury rather than suckage.

I don't understand what Millar is supposed to be contributing. Intangibles aren't quite as useful when winning doesn't matter.

Is it not perfectly clear that Kevin Millar is not OK as a DH/1B for 300 PAs/season? Is it also not perfectly clear that Alex Rios belongs in centerfield?

Yes and yes.

As I've said before, if Millar is on the roster on August 1 then serious questions need to be raised of the front office. His presence is barely tolerable for now, but JP needs to release him as soon as the rebuilding begins and he realises he can't do Millar a favour because no contender wants him/he can't get a C prospect for him/Dopirak needs to get some MLB playing time.

Alex,

thanks for the song info...  Summertime Dream can be heard here:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hihi8lmn7zM

if anyone's interested

I hope Millar is gone asap

That's a great shot of Rzepczynski's grip on the change-up. Same as Jimmy Key (taught him by Doyle Alexander) - the circle change. Memories.

I think I remember Bryn Smith throwing that one too, and sometimes it was referred to as the "a-okay change".

This morning was like so many other summer days of the past 8 years. I woke up, realized Doc was pitching and knew that it didn't matter how many Red Sox fans were at the game, or how dangerous Jason Bay is, or that we were 10 games back. Doc was pitching, and for at least this day, everything would be OK.

You just don't wake up and feel so incredibly awesome about the day ahead with Lester, Cueto, Kershaw, or Chamberlain. You may feel great, but it isn't/won't be the same.

It always seemed to me that the obvious excuse to move Wells was to claim Snider's best use was in RF - they are in danger of letting that opportunity pass if they call him up and stick him in left again.

It seems to me that if 2009 REALLY is about formatting for 2010 as they said in the spring, then it was reasonable to SEE if Wells glove rebounded (it hasn't if you believe the metrics) and it is also reasonable to go ahead and make that shift when Snider gets back so he can work out his issues with it, if any there be, in a "write off" season instead of when it counts.


I can't add to what has been said re Millar.

This morning was like so many other summer days of the past 8 years. I woke up, realized Doc was pitching and knew that it didn't matter how many Red Sox fans were at the game, or how dangerous Jason Bay is, or that we were 10 games back. Doc was pitching, and for at least this day, everything would be OK.

Oh, how he will be missed. It's enough to break a fan's heart.

I didn't even know that the Jays were 10 back - I stopped looking at the standings ages ago. Why add to the sum total of human misery?

With this rotation and Rios in CF, the Blue Jays can go 49 - 20 from here and finish with 95 wins.  I'll try not to be unfair to Ricciardi, but the team's biggest problem seems to be a rogue GM.  Is it not the consensus across baseball that he should be fired?

As I have said in a previous thread - our current problem is ownership - OBVIOUSLY they have told JP to cut now or (more likely) that next year will be lean.

Talk is Rolen will be gone and Scutaro not resigned. IF we trade Roy to the White Sox we'll likely get the Cuban exile SS Alexis Ramirez who is 27, just in his second year - we'd control him until the end of the 2014 season who is presently hiting 276/330/410 with 11 homers (Scutaro is hitting: 284/383/415 with 6 homers). 3rd will be a problem - but our pitching is going to surprisingly good EVEN if we got no pitching back for Roy - with the White Sox we could get 24 year old lefty John Danks back, we'd control him untill the end of 2012 and he's presently - 106 innings, 97 hits, 40 BB, 92 SO's, 3.98 ERA, 1.29 WHIP.

It would be interesting to see what we could get for Rolen and Scutaro - 'specially Rolen who is signed for 2010 as well.

While I have never been a JP lover - I didn't like him for the "snub" to O'Dog for calling JP a pimp - I've grown to actually like the guys judgement these past few years. I think hte guy is doing a good job NOW. I'm happy to see him stay. Personally - I think he'll be happy to be out of here after his contract.

Jon Heyman has some good stuff on the Halladay trade talk over at si.com

It appears the Jays and Phillies have discussed players. Michael Taylor, Jason Donald, and Carlos Carrasco's names were brought up. There's no sign of the Phils number 1 (Kyle Drabek) and number 2 (Dominic Brown) prospect in the mix. If that type of trade goes down, it will be your classic 30 cents on the dollar trade (ala Johan Santana trade). I wouldn't trade Doc to the Phillies unless Hamels, Drabek, and Brown were coming to the Jays.

The best trade partner is the New York Yankees. A package including Hughes, Montero, Jackson, and another A ball pitching prospect is fair value for Halladay. One angle that has been ignored by the media and fans is that the team trading for Halladay could trade him away next season (assuming Doc approves of it). If they don't trade him, they would get 2 draft picks and have a lot of payroll space to sign other FA's, go over slot in the draft, money to sign international rookies/free agents, etc...

Ron, the Phillies wouldn't trade Hamels for Halladay straight up.

Dave, it's funny you say that you stopped checking the standings - didn't you say earlier in the season how you don't even bother with the standings until now?

Ron, the Phillies wouldn't trade Hamels for Halladay straight up.

Oh I know there's no chance in hell the Phils would trade Hamels for Halladay. I don't believe the Jays will get equal value for Halladay so that's why it's better to hang on to him. There's a big difference between what I want in return versus what teams are willing to give up. LIke I said in another thread, if Halladay is traded, I expect 60 cents on the dollar in return.

If your goal is to win the World Series, you should be adding players like Halladay to your roster, not subtracting them.

I don't believe the Jays will get equal value for Halladay so that's why it's better to hang on to him. There's a big difference between what I want in return versus what teams are willing to give up. LIke I said in another thread, if Halladay is traded, I expect 60 cents on the dollar in return.

How many cents on the dollar are you going to get when Halladay walks away as a free agent?

Either ownership must increase relative payroll over the coming years or else the Jays hve no choice but to trade Halladay before his contract runs out.

The talk of Halladay returning anything less than the other team's top prospect has me worried.  Any trade with the White Sox must include Beckham, not Ramirez, and any trade with the Phillies would need to bring back Drabek and Donald, as a start.  Otherwise the Jays should hold on to Halladay and get another season with him.

If Halladay is not traded and ends up leaving as a free agent, you're likely to get a first rounder and a supplemental. To give up that plus the revenue loss associated with a missed year and a half of Halladay, you need more than mediocre prospects like Jason Donald, who will be 25 years old in five weeks and has not hit in triple A this year.  At this point, his value is less than a supplemental. 

I do not agree that Halladay must be traded. 

I refuse to believe, given how awesome Doc is, that we can't get the team's top 2 prospect, and at least 3 of the top 10.  As I read somewhere we should be able to circle any 3-5 we want.  I don't care about any other factors.  Any contending team will be elevated to the top of the list with the addition of Roy, especially if they have a #1 horse.  It will be like Johnson/Schilling in Arizona during their WS run again.

I wouldn't trade Doc to the Phillies unless Hamels, Drabek, and Brown were coming to the Jays.

The best trade partner is the New York Yankees. A package including Hughes, Montero, Jackson, and another A ball pitching prospect is fair value for Halladay.

Sounds like typical NY talk radio:  "Your team has to give up your ace and your two top prospects, and we only need to give up a failed prospect who's a nice bullpen arm, one top prospect (disguised as a catcher), an over-hyped B prospect and some other guy I've never heard of".

Ron is right. The Jays can't sell Halladay for cheap. If the Phillies want him then Kyle Drabek is part of the package.

The Yanks could field a really good package, but I'm always leery when the Yanks offer their prospects in trades. They never seem to pan out. Also, I'd rather the Jays use a Yanks package to get something more out of Philly or L.A.

I think Millar is Cito's Jacob Brumfield this season. He always has affection for some poorly performing veteran.

The talk of Halladay returning anything less than the other team's top prospect has me worried.

What talk?  Ron talk?  Certainly Heyman never implied that.  He suggested only that they might not be too high on Drabek.

 

The draft picks for Roy have value, but this team needs players for 2010-2014, not picks in the June 2011 draft. The Yankees and Phillies trades in this thread are both ridiculous.

The Yankees aren't going to overpay, they don't need to and they have realized they can wait until a player is a free agent and overpay with dollars instead of players. I know some of you think that won't with Roy and it might not, but people said the same thing about Sabathia last year. No one thought they were going to land Teixiera either, and look how that turned out...

Actually, I disagree with that completely.  In terms of timing, the club is likely to need to do a complete rebuild after 2010.  Draft picks generically have more value than double A/triple A prospects save for ones that can come in and contribute significantly in 2010. 

If you let Halladay walk as a free agent after 2010 you had better be prepared to lose 300 total games between 2011 and 2013.

The Jays will be in the AL East with a $55 million dollar payroll (80-VW), with no return on Halladay except 2 picks in June of 2011 which could be 27th and 43rd. If you can't turn Halladay into something that contributes from 2010-2014 the franchise is dead in the water.

 The only chance of even sniffing .500 after Halladay comes down to what they get in exchange for him. If they get a Haren package they are alive, if they get a Santana package they are dead.

That's all about good packages vs. bad packages.  My point was that they're pretty clearly better off with the picks than a bad package.  If you are going to decrease payroll and you are stuck with Wells' contract, you might as well build for the time when that contract is off the books. 

It's not just draft picks for Doc though. If Rolen continues to play this well and leaves, you'll get two for him...ditto for Downs. If Overbay does just right - and is still here, he MIGHT get you one.

When you count the two they already have, that's up to nine picks in the first 75 or so.

Not that that would make 2011,12,13 better but still, it's worth noting.

I disagree wholeheartedly with the doom and gloom about those years though, Doc or no Doc. i don't think we are contenders without him but neither do I think we're a train wreck.

At least, in terms of potential - it's certainly POSSIBLE to catch enough bad breaks to be that bad.

Marcum/Romero/Cecil/Zap/Richmond or whoever could potentially be a fine rotation.

Hill, Snider, and Lind are a solid enough core, and Rios and Wells are not likely to be as bad as they are this year. IF JPA panned out and one of Cooper or Dopirak or Loewen then you are potentially weak offensively at SS and 3B would remain an open question (Emaus? FA?)

It's debateable how good that team is, and there are certainly variables, but there is NO guarantee it will suck - not by a long shot.

As for paying it - Wells, Rios and Hill would combine for $40 million, true, but But 4/5 of your rotation, probably a lot of your bullpen, Snider and JPA and the 1b/DH and maybe your SS and 3B will all be pre arbitration so the flexibility to spend some money is there. Just at a quick glance, if they filled out the roster internally (besides the three expensive guys) they could EASILY do it for no more than 15 mil...so that would be a $55 million payroll and unless you have some info we don't, there's no reason to think they couldn't or wouldn't spend another 15-25 more.

Yes.  With Halladay, Rolen and Scutaro gone and no ready replacements, this team could potentially be a .500 club if things go right in 2011-2014.  Personally, I'd rather have the 15th overall pick in the 2011 draft who might equally be the next Russ Adams or the next Cole Hamels in 2015 than Jason Donald.  Heck, I'd rather have the 32nd pick who might be next Zack Greinke or the next Zach Jackson. 

But youneverknow.  The team could be sold and the team could decide to countercyclically invest.  This might very well work.  Toronto is not intrinsically the same kind of market as Montreal or Florida.

It's not just draft picks for Doc though.

It's not quite that simple.  You want to get picks for Rolen?  You've got to be willing to pay him 13+MM in arbitration if he accepts.  More players then ever are going to accept, especially the A's.  Bobby Abreu got 5MM and 1 year.  Who is going to risk that when they can guarantee themselves 13+? 

 

It's not quite that simple.  You want to get picks for Rolen?  You've got to be willing to pay him 13+MM in arbitration if he accepts.

I think the base salary for 2010 is $9m, with St. Louis paying him $4m in deferred signing bonus in 2010.  I"m not sure what the basis is for a qualifying offer.  There's a good probability that the line between where he accepts a qualifying offer and where he opts for FA lies somewhere between $9m and $13m, depending on how his performance shakes out over the next year or so.

I thought he was making 13 straight up. If he's a Type A there is no way he's taking a pay cut, so call it 11. Does it really matter if it's 11 or 13?

Either way it's a huge risk that a player in his mid-30s who has had a million injury issues might accept arbitration.

If the team isn't good now is the way to make it better to hold onto to old players for two more years from now when they are going to be worse then they are now?

Just at a quick glance, if they filled out the roster internally (besides the three expensive guys) they could EASILY do it for no more than 15 mil

Let me get this right: They are going to have Wells, Hill and Rios and 22 players averaging making $681,818 and they are going to compete in the American League East. 

They could EASILY fill out the roster of 22 guys for 9 million dollars, but the 51s aren't even competitive in the PCL, I'm fairly sure the American League will be tougher.

It's not quite that simple.  You want to get picks for Rolen?  You've got to be willing to pay him 13+MM in arbitration if he accepts.  More players then ever are going to accept, especially the A's.  Bobby Abreu got 5MM and 1 year.  Who is going to risk that when they can guarantee themselves 13+?

You're telling me that a 35 year old 3B with a serious injury history is going to be in line for a 2 million RAISE?

I strongly disagree.

I'll accept the premise that if the Jays are going into Expo-mode they might not risk him accepting at any price, but i totally disagree that such price would be anywhere close to 13 million

You're telling me that a 35 year old 3B with a serious injury history is going to be in line for a 2 million RAISE?

It's pretty simple:

To get 2 picks he has to be Type A

If he's a Type A he's having good seasons

If he's having good seasons he is getting a raise in arbitration

If he's Type A there won't be much interest in the free agent market for him

Therefore he can accept and you've got a 35 year old 3rd baseman whose shoulder can quit at any moment you are paying 8 figures

Agreed. There's no way Scott Rolen is a Type-A free agent if he doesn't command a raise when he goes to arbitration. I don't get the sense that arbitrators look at injury history very closely, except, of course, as it has affected playing time over the last season or so.

Shawn Hill is one of many players with significant injury issues to win their arbitration cases.

Scott Rolen has 12 years of major league service. Arbitration doesn't enter the picture. He's either under contract or he's a free agent.

Let's say that Rolen continues to hit .300 and proceeds on a 40 double- 10 homer pace for 500 at-bats in a season. As a player with 15 years service and a good glove, he would do very well in arbitration.  Garret Atkins got 7.05 million with 4 years of service this past arbitration season.  He had much less service time, and was a far lesser player than Rolen.

Magpie, what am I missing? Wouldn't Rolen's situation after 2010 be like Varitek's at the end of 2008? Their team could elect to offer them arbitration for a one-year deal, thereby making them eligible for the compensatory draft picks should they sign with another team.

Sorry, Magpie, I am pretty sure that players with more than 10 years experience (like Varitek and Manny last year) must be offered arbitration when eligible for free agency in order for the club to receive compensatory picks if the player signs with another club.

Varitek and Manny declined last year.

Scott Rolen has 12 years of major league service. Arbitration doesn't enter the picture. He's either under contract or he's a free agent.

Or not.  If the Jays want the compensation they have to offer him arbitration and he has to decline to become a free agent.

 

Let me get this right: They are going to have Wells, Hill and Rios and 22 players averaging making $681,818 and they are going to compete in the American League East.

The Rays have 19 players on their current roster making collectively less than 15 mil and they are doing ok.

Let me ballpark a 2011 roster for you. All slots filled internally except one, although a couple are interchangeable with cheap FA filler. Assumes Doc is gone.

Under contract now in bold, arbitration in italics Pre-arb guys rounded to two decimal places for simplicity.

Marcum - 3
Romero - .42
Cecil - .42
Rzep.- .42
Richmond - .43

League - 1.9
Janssen - 1.4
Accardo - 2.3
Carlson - .44
Mills - .41
Ray - .4
Castro - .4

Arencibia - .4
Jeroloman - .4 (feel free to sub a Chavez type her if you like)

Lind - 1.1
Dopirak/Cooper - .4

Hill - 5
Campbell - .4

Scutaro (resigned for lack of better option) - 5
Arias* - .41

Emaus - .4
Inglett - .41

Snider - .41
Wells - 23
Rios - 12
Loewen** - .4

* Arias is just a placeholder. It could be any fringy guy we signed or traded a spare pitching part for.

**Loewen is a bit of a fetish of mine, feel free to substitute Coats or some journeyman OF reserve if you like

Yes, there are 27 guys there. That's just for flexibility's sake.

The total there is $61.67. You can quibble of course...stick a veteran reserve catcher in and bump that cost up a couple hundred K for instance...but yes, if everyone played to their potential that's not the Pirates you are looking at there.

OF COURSE it's possible that any number of those kids could fail, it's also possible Lind and Snider are both high .900 OPS hitters over the next five years and Hill is the best 2B in the AL and Rios and Wells rebound into the .800's somewhere and the other guys there are pasaably in the area of league average. It's possible that that starting staff features five above average pitchers (and I didn't even mention Listch, McGowan, or Purcey or any of the lower minors guys)

 I expect the result would be somewhere in the middle...a roughtly 77-85 win team in any given year.

But that's also a team with potentially $20 million to spend depending on the teams budget.

Jim and I owe Chuck a cola.  PC with Bacardi's in honour of the season?

Hill just had three years service, so perhaps he wasn't the most illustrative example, but my recollection is that past injuries are only marginal issues at arbitration hearings. And to be Type-A Rolen would have had two presumably healthy seasons in 2009 and 2010, so he could make a convincing argument that his injury troubles are behind him, anyway.

I'm sure the slim chances of landing Kershaw are getting slimmer with each solid Kershaw performance, but Billingsley hasn't been particularly good lately. Frankly, if I were the Dodgers I'd much rather part with Billingsley than Kershaw. I'd rather have 2 playoff runs with Halladay plus an excellent chance at an extension with the best pitcher in baseball than 4 (potential) playoff runs with Billingsley. However, I'd rather have Kershaw over Halladay and I assume the Dodgers feel the same.

One option could be for the Jays to add pieces to get Kershaw/Billingsley or maybe even someone like Ethier. For example, adding Halladay while losing Kershaw and prospects isn't that big of a gain for the next season and a half and a huge loss (espescially considering money) from 2011 onward for the Dodgers. However, if the trade were something like Halladay, Tallet & Frasor then the Dodgers could legitimately shore up their 'pen, number 5 starter spot AND upgrade Halladay over Kershaw. Heck, if it was Halladay AND Richmond the Jays could get Kershaw AND a minor league bounty...one would hope. Instead of trying to package VW with Halladay I'd rather the Jays add complimentary pieces to get the most valuable (from a cost perspective) player in the trade and for me, that would be Kershaw...though I can't see him being moved...

Trade scenarios:

1. Halladay/Tallet/Frasor for Kershaw & a 2-3 B+ to B- prospects.

2. Halladay/Richmond/Frasor/Bautista for Billinsgley/Ethier & 2 B prospects

3. Halladay/Richmond/Frasor for Kershaw & 5 prospects

Heck I would trade Halladay & Richmond for Kershaw straight up, but that is just me.

As unlikely as it is, I would like the see the Jays receive some ML talent (not just prospects) back in a trade because I do think it is possible to trade Halladay and improve the chances for 2010 if the team is willing to spend Halladay's 2010 salary on a free agent or two (i.e. resigning Scoot and signing a slugger of some type or a one yr deal for another pitcher such as Bedard). I think it is very possible that a rotation of Bedard, Romero, Marcum, Kershaw & Cecil/Zep could be better than Halladay, Romero, Marcum, Richmond & Cecil/Zep. Of course, the former rotation would likely log less innings...

that's not the Pirates you are looking at there

True, that team would even make Pittsburgh wince.  That team is a 100 loss embarrassment.

As of now Scott Rolen is a Type A free agent, and I can't believe the majority of you are expecting a raise in arbitration significant enough to scare away the Jays from offering him arbitration (assuming payroll isn't an issue). Rolen's counting stats are basically on par with somebody like Pedro Feliz, so comparing him to the sort of money Atkins got in arbitration, even with his limited MLB playing time, is absurd - Atkins has quite the counting stats over the last 3 years, Coors or not, numbers Rolen will never approach again.

 

Ethier's not as young as you think - I really don't think there's any reason for the Jays to ask for him back in a trade.

And Jim, please, tone down '3 consecutive 100 loss year' talk.   Maybe things will turn out badly.  However, the Jays are not about to turn into one of the most historically terrible teams of all time. Very few teams ever end up that bad - less than one per decade.  (There were the Royals this decade, Jays in the 70s, Boston Braves in the 20s, Pittsburgh in the 50s, etc).  No matter what you think of JP, i think most of us can agree that he's not a historically inept GM.

As of now Scott Rolen is a Type A free agent, and I can't believe the majority of you are expecting a raise in arbitration significant enough to scare away the Jays from offering him arbitration (assuming payroll isn't an issue).

I don't think many of us are arguing the Jays wouldn't or shouldn't offer Rolen arbitration if payroll wasn't an issue. I'd certainly hope they would.

However, there are growing indications that payroll will be an issue and, if that's the case, then offering Rolen arbitration becomes a more risky proposition.

assuming payroll isn't an issue

The payroll is already an issue.  If it wasn't the internet, TV and papers wouldn't be filled with Roy Halladay trade rumors.  There is almost no way that the Jays can offer Rolen arbitration if he's a Type A.  He'll have to accept and they won't be able to pay him 10+MM.  They would be much better served to trade him to someone who could afford that contract and can take that risk. 

Fine, 3 straight 100 loss seasons is strong.  However, there really is no precident for the schedule that the Jays and Orioles are playing going forward.  The Yankees and Red Sox have figured how better then ever how to flex their financial muscle and the Rays are at the start of their sweet spot for contending.  The Jays are going to continue to play 35% of their games against these three teams.

A run of the mill 90-93 loss team looks much worse when they play 35% of their games against .600 winning percentage opponents.  The Yankees, Red Sox and Rays if they didn't have to play each other all project as 95+ win teams for the near future.  I'd guess they are all getting over 90 this year, certainly New York and Boston are and Tampa will be close behind if not right with them. 

The BP PECOTA playoff odds have the Sox at 97, the Yankees at 96 and the Rays at 88 (give or take a fraction of a win).  To obtain those records they have to play .589 baseball when they aren't playing each other.  Take Halladay off the Jays and put him with the Red Sox or Yankees and you are talking about 3 teams that play to a composite .600 winning percentage when they don't play each other. 

The Jays for all intents and purposes are screwed:
There is no deal coming that will give you even 75% of Halladay's worth.  However, there is no way to put together a team that can even hope to compete from 2011-2014 without cashing in Halladay.  Trade Halladay and the fans are mad and attendance is down.  Don't trade Halladay and the team sinks to fifth and attendance goes down.

The folks that are optimistic here seem to think they have enough pitching to keep them competitive.  This team already has a good staff with a vintage Roy Halladay and the team is going to struggle to stay around .500.  Halladay makes every pitcher in the bullpen better by going deep in games and keeping them from being overworked.  I like Cecil and Zep and Romero has been a pleasant suprise, but there is little chance that the 2011 rotation will be as good as the 2009 rotation.  The 2009 Roy Halladay is just that good.  If the rotation isn't as good and the offense isn't as good, and the competition is better....  I'm missing how things don't get worse?

 

 

"However, there are growing indications that payroll will be an issue and, if that's the case, then offering Rolen arbitration becomes a more risky proposition."

Growing indications? Where? Nobody has ever said payroll needs to be slashed. The only thing we've heard on that front is that Beeston didn't think it was worth spending the extra money this offseason, but if he went to Rogers with something that made sense they'd have no problem with it. The number 120m was floated around. Don't confuse saying Halladay is available because he likely can't be extended past 2010 as meaning the team's payroll is about to take an even bigger dive.

The Jays have 41m locked into Wells, Rios, and Hill for 2011, and will be paying Marcum in his 2nd year of arbitration, Lind and (maybe) Litsch in their first years; the rest of the team will be making peanuts. Without a 3B anywhere near MLB ready, I don't see what the big risk will be in offering Rolen arbitration, something a veteran like him likely turns down so he can have a chance to win elsewhere. Can you really see Rolen, someone who by then will have made over 100m in his career, staying in Canada during what's likely to be a semi-rebuild just so he can make 11-13m instead of whatever he can get on the open market?

How many cents on the dollar are you going to get when Halladay walks away as a free agent?

Certainly not equal value. Which leads me to my next point…..

Either ownership must increase relative payroll over the coming years or else the Jays hve no choice but to trade Halladay before his contract runs out.

Ownership needs to increase not only the major league payroll but also the budget for the draft/international rookies. I know they dipped into the international market this season but all of the players they sign aren’t in the elite group.

How often do the Blue Jays get a Halladay type player? Not often. Considering how hard it is to obtain elite players, why would you trade him? If ownership thinks attendance this season is low, just wait until next season when you see crowds of under 10,000 while Joe Six Pack takes the field for the Jays.

It hurts me to say this, but the Jays have been on the path to nowhere since they last won the World Series. Someone wake me up when this nightmare is over.

Surfing the Blue Jays blogdom these days, I'm finding it difficult to find any objective analysis, whatsoever.  The negative-Nellies are spewing doom and the balance have become drama queens, waxing poetic over the loss of their chosen one.  Logic, why have you forsaken us?

The folks that are optimistic here seem to think they have enough pitching to keep them competitive.  This team already has a good staff with a vintage Roy Halladay and the team is going to struggle to stay around .500.  Halladay makes every pitcher in the bullpen better by going deep in games and keeping them from being overworked.  I like Cecil and Zep and Romero has been a pleasant suprise, but there is little chance that the 2011 rotation will be as good as the 2009 rotation.  The 2009 Roy Halladay is just that good.  If the rotation isn't as good and the offense isn't as good, and the competition is better....  I'm missing how things don't get worse.

What, you think the other 4 pitchers are as good as they are ever going to be?

Let's say we use wins as a shorthand )I know wins are a meaningless stat this is just illustration) and let's say that Doc has a 22 win value....and a healthy Marcum has a 15 win value (not unreasonable) then that means that the other 4 guys (RR, BC, MR, and SR) or whoever, you can include Listch if you want, have to each be about 2 wins better than they are in their rookie year in order to make up the difference.

if I wanted to be complex and remotely accurate i could go to BTBS or someplace and get win shares or something but you get the idea.

How is it so impossible the Doc and 4 rookies have a value of X and Marcum and, potentially, Listch, McGowan, romero, Cecil, Zep, Richmond, Mills, and etc are a group that cannot remotely get within a mile of X? I simply don't agree with that. I DO agree it's tough to get frou the .500 or a bit better area into true contention without Doc - that's a matter of X+.
But I disagree strongly that group is wqithout a doubt going to be far worse. There's every reason to think that the kids will be better with experience, that Marcum (who has obviously contributed nothing to this current campaing) will be his old self or better by then, ditto Listch. And that's assuming McG is done and Purcey fails.

Furthermore, that is a team that COULD benifit from a Rios who has figured out how to be the the .860ish hitter he was for two years running....From a Wells who got back to the .825ish area (which he produced (collectively) for the six season preceeding this one....from a Travis Snider who blossems into a 40 homer threat...all of which we don't have this year, to go along with 30 homer potential from two other players (Hill and Lind).

So both offensively and pitching wise, the kids are not static.

As I said before, all of this or part of this COULD fail. All the young pitchers could get hurt, Snider could takes years to figure out major league pitching, Wells and Rios could be done...etc, etc, etc.

But you can no more assume the worst case than you can the best case.

I think it's REASONABLE to suggest that out of some nine or ten possibilities, that the Jays starting staff is as good or better in the agregate in 2011 as it has been in 2009. It's reasonable to suggest Hill and Lind consolodate their gains, Rios and Wells return to levels they have shown themselve capeable of, and that Snider lives up to his billing.

It might not, but it's not starry eyed optimism.

I think Millar is Cito's Jacob Brumfield this season.

Of all the players to insult, how dare you besmirch my good name!! This cannot be tolerated!  At least Brumfield had a decent 1996 season with the Jays.  :D

Millar's stats are just getting worse as the season goes along.  A .343 April followed by .218 in May, .200 in June and .154 in July.  The last time he's gone deep was over a month ago when he belted that clutch homer against the Marlins in that 11-3 loss June 14.  His batting eye has gone to hell as evidenced by looking at strike three thrice on Saturday.

Surfing the Blue Jays blogdom these days, I'm finding it difficult to find any objective analysis, whatsoever.  The negative-Nellies are spewing doom and the balance have become drama queens, waxing poetic over the loss of their chosen one.  Logic, why have you forsaken us?

Logically, on paper, I see the upside of dealing Doc and the potential negatives of losing him. But I'm illogical enough to feel like on occasion things go beyond paper. Take Rios for example, or Overbay. If you can make a deal for those guys that makes your team better, do it. Period. Move on.

rolen is a bit tougher because you can't replace his skill set, and because he does bring perhaps a "fire in the belly" that a team needs. but if they did deal him and got a good deal - and figured out how to competently fill 3B...ok...I could suck it up.

But Doc? Besides the impossibility of replacing his contributions between the lines, there's also the profound influance he has on the young pitchers in his orbit, there's also the impecable image and reputation he has in the community, and with the fans. Men of his character are almost as rare as men of his talant. Then there's the loyalty factor, which is very difficult to duplicate.

There's just a LOT more to consider than an annual run at the Cy Young.

I still say that it should be a reasonable compromise to xtend him for - for instance - 3 years with an opt out after 2 or some such. We get a little bigger window and he still has time to chase the ring after 2013 if it comes to that.

Let's say we use wins as a shorthand )I know wins are a meaningless stat this is just illustration) and let's say that Doc has a 22 win value....and a healthy Marcum has a 15 win value (not unreasonable) then that means that the other 4 guys (RR, BC, MR, and SR) or whoever, you can include Listch if you want, have to each be about 2 wins better than they are in their rookie year in order to make up the difference.

Marcum before he got hurt wasn't that close to Halladay in value and I like Marcum a lot.  Romero is going to pitch better then this?  Yes, Cecil will be better.  Is Richmond going to be better then this?    Zep has already been declared a solid member of the rotation here, Keith Law says he's a reliever.  He debuted in the majors and his own manager hadn't ever seen him pitch.  How about we let him get scouted by the advance guys and the hitters adjust before we decide he's a long term contributor.  80 innings above single A of success is a great start, but he's not replacing Halladay.  

I've always found this hard to believe but Roy Halladay is somehow underrated by Jays' fans.  He's the best pitcher in baseball.  He'd turn the National League on it's ear if he pitched in Linsecum's division.  Look what Sabathia did to the NL Central last season. 

Is it possible that the 2011 rotation is better then 2009?  Sure, I guess anything is possible in sports.  To build your franchise around the notion that you'll be better or the same WITHOUT the best pitcher of his generation anymore seems like hope and faith and not the probable reality.

Marcum before he got hurt wasn't that close to Halladay in value and I like Marcum a lot.  Romero is going to pitch better then this?  Yes, Cecil will be better.  Is Richmond going to be better then this?    Zep has already been declared a solid member of the rotation here, Keith Law says he's a reliever.  He debuted in the majors and his own manager hadn't ever seen him pitch.  How about we let him get scouted by the advance guys and the hitters adjust before we decide he's a long term contributor.  80 innings above single A of success is a great start, but he's not replacing Halladay.

The hole in your reasoning is that in 2009 Doc is probably 70-80% of the value of the rotation. In any normal year he wouldn't be.

In a normal year Tallet wouldn't have started half the season and Zep wouldn't have made it all the way up and Mills wouldn't have pitched here at all, or Burres, or Cecil yet.

In a normal year our rotation is Doc/Marcum/McGowan/Listch and ...Janssen?

In that rotation, Doc doesn't have to be the only source of predictable value.

Likewise, in 2011 there's no reason to assume he would be if he were here, and there's no reason that we can expect to have the sort of cut & paste rotation we have this year in 2011.

I'm NOT saying the rotation will be better without Doc, or that his value isn't stunning. In fact, I would say that my 80-85 win team in 2011 is a contender with Doc here.

What I am saying is that Doc's value to the current team is mitigated by the uncertainty and under-performance of the balance of the rotation.

YES Romero is doing as well in ERA as he may ever do, but in 2011 he might go deeper into games, he may be more consistant, he might just simply not hurt himself sneezing.

Cecil you concede will get better but Zep is pretty much a placeholder...it could be Listch, it could be McGowan, it could be Mills. Yes he's pitched his butt off but for THREE games. How much does that add to the Jays rotation over the course of 90+ games? Certainly not enough for us to forget how many bad starts we got from half a dozen other guys.

Lay aside Romero and Richmond as guys we will assume are static for the sake of illustration-

Here's the combined line for all the games started by Listch, Tallet, Cecil, Purcey, Janssen, Burres, Mills, Zep and Ray:

48 starts
5.82 ERA
1.60 WHIP

That's over 2.5 times the number of starts you got from Doc so far.

Now - let's add Doc into that and see what you get.:

4.77 ERA
1.42 WHIP

So lets say Romero and Richmond remain static, and get a turn every five days - do I argue that that the other three pitchers (and three you want from Marcum, Cecil, Zep, Listch, Mills, McGowan, and Ray..hell Castro or Jenkins or whoever else if you want) can easily post a collective ERA and WHIP better than 4.77/1.42

Yes - yes I do.

They might not, but it is FAR from unreasonable.

I still say that it should be a reasonable compromise to xtend him for - for instance - 3 years with an opt out after 2 or some such. We get a little bigger window and he still has time to chase the ring after 2013 if it comes to that.

I would love to keep Doc and I completely agree that someone like him cannot be replaced even if somehow the wins add up. The question is then what type of contract should he get? I have now read a few times "give him three years and then he can still get a ring in 2013". But why would he risk his big payday like that. The only option would be to give him more or less a fair deal (5-6 years, 20+mill, at least) and give him an opt out or maybe a conditional opt out (e.g. if no AL championship) after 3 years. The question is whether Rogers would agree to that?

But why would he risk his big payday like that.

Both he and his wife have said publiclly and repeatedly that he is NOT motivated by money. His priorities appear to be (a) the ring; (b) the best interest of the team; (c) "fair" pay

In that order.

The only option would be to give him more or less a fair deal (5-6 years, 20+mill, at least) and give him an opt out or maybe a conditional opt out (e.g. if no AL championship) after 3 years. The question is whether Rogers would agree to that?

I think they would, and I think it's a reasonable concept. but i also think that we need to remember that there's no real precedent for giving a player who's completed his age 32 season a contract longer than 5 years, so it's not like it has to be that long to be "fair"

"Fair" in Doc's case is about AAV, not length. If he were a FA this year, the fact that the out years would be his age36-37 seasons WOULD drive down the otherwise "fair" AAV because teams wouldn't want to risk him not being a $23 million pitcher at the age of 36.

On the other hand, he could easily follow the Clemens model - a three year deal followed by a series of 3 year or less deal depending on whether he's still Doc Halladay at 35 or a guy who's in noticeable decline.

Another alternative...somewhere between your suggestion and mine...is to have a deal that is essentially 3+3 with the first three being a pretty standard $20 mil a year or some such right across and the last three be a set of conditional options that protect both sides. For instance, doc could choose to pick up the option at a rate of, for instance, $15 mil per (IF his skill set has declined or he has gotten his ring or both) OR The Jays could choose to pick it up at (for instance) $22 per as a mutual option.

That gives Doc the right to bail if he hasn't gotten the Ring, or if he thinks he can do better than that contract, or he can stay at the higher rate if the Jays are willing and able to pay it by then for whatever reason.

What you sacrifice by doing this is that you would lose the ability to deal him in 2013 unless something was built into the contract saying he must notify the team by July 1 if he's planning to exercise the option.

Bottom line is, a deal shouldn't be limited to traditional thinking.
 

Bottom line is, a deal shouldn't be limited to traditional thinking.

Agreed. A one year, $24.25 mill extension with a $4.25 mill signing bonus payable on April 1, 2010. That way if the 2010 team is as good as some (such as myself) think it can be, Doc can sign an actual extension (if he desires to do so) after 2010. If the 2010 team isn't good enough, Doc can be traded at next year's deadline for the bucketload the Jays are looking for at this deadline and the team that acquires him will only have to pay a prorated $15.75 mill for 2010 and $20 mill for 2011...very reasonable for the game's best pitcher. Nobody will be giving anything extra to the Jays because Doc's last year on his contract is a few million dollars higher (still below market value). This would require JP/Beeston convincing Doc and considering that Doc clearly will do just about everything he can to simultaneously satisfy his own goals as well as the Blue Jays goals, maybe it could happen.

Yah, optimistic as hell - but Doc seems to want to win in TO if it is possible, he has a great relationship with JP and Beeston seems to command respect...so who the hell knows. If anyone would be amenable to a one year deal like this (knowing that he could quite possibly command a 4 year, $100 million extension in a few months from a contending NL team, for example), it would be Doc.

I'd think it would be cool to do something like Wakefield has in Boston.

sign him to a 3 year extension that's locked in, say 20 mil per (I know it's under market but he's not about the money) then after that, they have a renewable mutual option every year for 2 milion less than the year before

so by age he makes, if he stayed

33 - 20
34 - 20
35 - 20
36 - 18
37 - 16
38 - 14
39 - 12
40 - 10
41 - 8
42 - 6
And 6 per thereafter as long as they want to keep it going.


At the end of each season, either partner can decline the option and end the chain.

Also an opt out might mean "I'm leaving" or it might mean "I'm still kicking ass at 39 and I don't want to drop my annual salary anymore."

I'd think it would be cool to do something like Wakefield has in Boston.

Of course it would be cool.  It's ridiculously in the Jays' favor. 

Mutual options are pointless unless the salary is different for the player and team.  Both parties would have to agree on the contract, which is what they'd have to do anyway if there wasn't a 'mutual' option.

And Wakefield doesn't have a mutual option, it's a one year team option.

Of course it would be cool.  It's ridiculously in the Jays' favor.


How so if Doc can walk away any time he wants?


And Wakefield doesn't have a mutual option, it's a one year team option.

Of course, and the cost level never changes...I said SOMETHING like, not EXACTLY like

You'd be better off offering Doc a long term extension that includes an annuity until he's 60 and guaranteeing it all....a lock him up for life contract.

2011-14  -  $20m per

2015-16  -  $10m per

2016-17  -  $5m per

2018-36  -  $1m per

$139m deal.  If he retires after 2015, only the annuity is gauranteed.  (If he retires after 2014, it would be a four year, $99m extension.)

Or some similar structure.

sign him to a 3 year extension that's locked in, say 20 mil per (I know it's under market but he's not about the money) then after that, they have a renewable mutual option every year for 2 milion less than the year before

Getting Halladay extended at 3 years at 20 per is a HUGE discount.  Like a 2 year - 40 million dollar discount.  He can't 'walk-away' until he'd be too old to command a big contract.  Of course that's slanted in the Jays' favor.

It doesn't even really help the Jays that much anyway.  Halladay/Hill/Wells/Rios at >60MM doesn't leave a whole heck of a lot of room to build a team if you are at 80 million.  It's not like it's the core of a good team anyway.  It's a part of a core of this team and this isn't a good team. 

 

 

In reality Wakefield has a mutual option.  His option is to retire.  He has no desire to pitch for another organization, so although it's officially a team option, it works like a mutual option.

He can't 'walk-away' until he'd be too old to command a big contract.

Oh?

Randy Johnson has made $15 mil or more in every year of his 40's except one. I have the guaranteed part of that deal ending at 35.

Randy Johnson has made $15 mil or more in every year of his 40's except one.

But somehow you don't see a 3 year 60 million dollar extension as a ridiculous underpayment. 

But somehow you don't see a 3 year 60 million dollar extension as a ridiculous underpayment.

I never disagreed with that sentiment.

I offered an EXAMPLE of the STRUCTURE - not an estimate of what it would take to sign him over the next three years.

Although, I will say - as I have before - IF Doc resigns with the Jays it WILL be for an undermarket price because Doc and Brandi are botrh on record saying that the money isn't the key to the deal.

That said, those who are pointing to CC as the gold standard have to consider the relative ages. No one is going to vie a man facing his age 33 season a 7/170 deal

That said, those who are pointing to CC as the gold standard have to consider the relative ages. No one is going to vie a man facing his age 33 season a 7/170 deal

But Roy is arguably the better pitcher and has e.g. no weight concerns the way CC has. While I don't think 7/170 is realistic (though you never know, if the economy improves by then) 5/120 is. So the question is can the Jays convince Roy to take a cut both in years AND avg salary? Even if money is not the most important thing, that's not really fair to assume (he might, but we shouldn't count on it). Since the Jays need the break in avg salary, it would have to be something like 5 or 6 years, 18-20mill. But then you have to give him a chance to opt out, b/c he want to win.

Finally, if winning is the most important thing for Roy (and I believe him) he probably is better of signing with someone else who does not compete in the AL East and maybe even take less money there.