Numerous reports say that Alex Rios has been sent to the Chicago White Sox for no return. JP is saying this gives the team more flexibility and the money will be re-invested. We'll see.
More to come.
I'm bummed on this, what a waste IMO. I now expect Doc to be gone in the offseason. We now clearly see the direction of this team.
Invest in what? The free agent class the next two years is awful, and it's not like the draft is that expensive. Are they going to make a run at Sano or something?
Good move JP. I look at Rios' bad swing mechanics and shiver thinking he could be around another 5 years.
Great move by the White Sox. Kenny had an inclination that Rios could be had for naught, and he was right. Whether it's a good move for the Jays depends at least in part on how the savings is invested. But for now, we've gone from Rolen to Encarnacion and Rios to Snider, so defensively, we're heading in the wrong direction.
If this is a move in a forthcoming well thought out rebuilding process, then fine. If the plan is to field the best $80 million team money can buy, it's an open question whether I should continue to waste my time following this team.
I'll wait and see how the money is "reinvested."
Ugh. There goes our option to move Wells to a corner.
Well, if we're going to rebuild, I mean, if we need 'flexibility', let's get the yard sale sign up and clear some space.
Well, if we're going to rebuild, I mean, if we need 'flexibility', let's get the yard sale sign up and clear some space.
The team has 3 veteran hitting coaches. Anyone not hitting either has injury issues or coaching issues.
By that logic, he was quite coachable last year.
I'm surprisingly ambivalent about those move. He was very frustrating to watch.
http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=2090&position=OF
This is Rios' second season of regression.
This is the first time that I have legitimately questioned if I should continue to follow this team. Rogers clearly wants to sell the team, but who is going to buy this team in this economy?
I really wish that I could wager all the money I had (not much, I'm a starving college student) on the Jays losing tonight. This is going to be rough to watch.
I can understand a fan's frustration in what will be another painful year. However, Rogers would likely have an easier time selling the team with some of these long term high priced contracts off the books.
The Las Vegas line-up for tonight includes all four outfielders including Travis Snider. The game starts at 8 so we will see if the line-up changes before the game.
If Halladay demands a trade right now, I sure as hell wouldn't blame him!! Yes, Rios is frustrating but letting him go for nothing is just brutal. It'll be interesting to see how Rios does in Chicago because the fans won't tolerate his lackadaisical play. Who knows, this could be classical change of scenery that Rios needs to take it to the next level. Kenny Williams does it to the Jays again!
One interesting thing about the vegas line up is that Dopirak is not in the lineup, Lind to left Dopirak DH?
The perceptions of Rios's contract depends on whether you think the 2007/8 Rios is the way he will play in the future or if the 2009 Rios is as good as it will get.
Bob McCown on the FAN590 was suggesting that Rios was not a hard worker and didn't listen to instruction.
I doubt that all of the Rios contract will be reinvested, some of it will but not all of it. I don't think the team is for sale but it looks like the order has gone out to cut payroll.
I am more convinced now that Roy Halladay is headed out of town in the off-season.
I wonder if they'll invest the "Rios savings" like the "Burnett savings".
Well they better take the saved money and put some of it into signing their draft picks. :shakes fist:
Egads. JP's risk aversion strikes again. I guess there's a real chance Rios totally craters over the next few years - he is on the wrong side of 27 - and if that happened it would royally screw over the early '10s Jays. But there's also a real chance he finally puts it together, and getting out of this division can't hurt him. I'm ambivalent - I don't think there is any way the Jays would have gotten value for him without eating money (thus weakening their chances in 2010). I do feel strangely relieved, though our outfield defense could get ugly. Kenny Williams is a freakin' genius.
Taking on Peavy and Rios could end up getting Williams fired. Williams was considered a poor GM. He won a World Series and he got a lot of slack. Maybe he has gotten enough rope to do himself in. Besides, MLB is at fault for ruling the Sirotka trade to be allowed.
The Blue Jays paid Rios about 5 million dollars for the 2008-2009 seasons. I would say they made out nicely on that.
This is Rios' second season of regression.
Funny that you link to fangraphs, and then forget to mention that his overall value was his highest last year because of his defensive contributions. Or that his hitting regression was largely due to a reduction in BABIP.
Either way, based on his history, his expected production going forward was 10-15 runs above average offensively, and 5-10 runs above average defensively. That's 15-25 runs above average, and 3-4 wins above replacement (more if he spends more time in CF). That has a lot of value, more than his contract.
Definitely not a fan of this move, and in a vacuum it makes no sense. Only way it's 'defensible' is as part of a gutting / firesale. Of course, doesn't mean I'm going to stop watching - been a baseball junkie for 20 years, and that's not going to change now.
The Las Vegas line-up for tonight includes all four outfielders including Travis Snider.
If they throw away millions giving Snider an early call-up, this move will be even more frustrating.
It's hard to see this as a positive move in most senses - despite his struggles Rios was probably worth more than the value of his contract. I imagine Snider is going to replace Rios, or perhaps Inglett/Bautista, but the team is not improved day to day. If Rios hits halfway decent and the team finally decided to move him to CF and Vernon to right, he would actually be an asset.
It's hard to be a Jays fan at the moment, especially because the team is just going to try to stick it out in the middle rather than going for it or rebuilding. It makes no sense to dump Halladay and keep Rios, though this may not be a baseball decision. Still, this team will be hamstrung for the next 5 years by Vernon Well's contract - too bad no one claimed him on waivers.
It's hard to be a Jays fan at the moment, especially because the team is just going to try to stick it out in the middle rather than going for it or rebuilding. It makes no sense to dump Halladay and keep Rios, though this may not be a baseball decision. Still, this team will be hamstrung for the next 5 years by Vernon Well's contract - too bad no one claimed him on waivers.
OK That's it. They're giving up to save money and play the Pittsburgh/Kansas City game. What's a Canadian fan to do now - pretend the Expos are still there and cheer on the Nationals?
In reality, I've been cheering these guys on since 1977, and I expect I won't go away now. But it will be interesting to see what happens to attendance and TV ratings and scheduling once Halladay goes.
It was previously suggested (by Beeston) that budget will have to be tied to revenues. That means a budget in the 80 mil range. Only 3 years ago, the team was just as good, if not better, with a 50 mil tag. . No wonder that Godfrey has quit as he was the one to make the move on Wells that is killing the team. It will be impossible to compete for the next 4 years with that contract so a massive rebuilding is clearly in order as long as it does not involve rushing youngsters but do expect more vets (including Doc) to be moved for prospects.
Spifficus, his fielding was worth so much because of the time he took over for Wells in CF. The team is not willing to move Wells off the position.
milb says dopirak is indeed in the lineup today at 1B.
So for whoever thinks he's getting called up.
What's your source?
So for whoever thinks he's getting called up.
What's your source?
Jerry Howarth just said a call-up would be named tomorrow.
That was me on Dopirak, I had no source other than the first box score didn't have him listed in the lineup, it had Ruiz at first and now Dopirak is listed at first and Ruiz is out of the line up, the box scocre definelty changed, it was mentioned on other forums that Dopirak was out of the line up earlier as well. So, again no source, I'm wonder if Ruiz is up.
Spifficus, his fielding was worth so much because of the time he took over for Wells in CF. The team is not willing to move Wells off the position.
While he did do well in CF, a majority of his defensive value in 2008 was tied to his performance in right. CF did impact his positional adjustment, but not by as much as you think (by less than 3 runs vs the year before). 60% of his time was spent in RF, and he had a 15.5 UZR vs a 8.5 UZR in CF. Now, granted, that looks like a defensive career year for him, but his 'true talent' level is probably the +10 runs he was averaging before that. That's why I used +5-10 (my brain inherently regresses defense towards the mean).
Let's hope management now ends the: "we're going for it in 2010" facade.
Not dealing Doc and Scutaro at the deadline, two assets both at max value and about to get much more expensive, is exposed as an even greater strategic error now.
Id rather see the money saved from Burnett and Rios re-invested back into the draft. Sort of what the Pirates are doing. There is no way the Jays can compete to bring the big name free agents to town, so the best way to invest their money is in home grown talent. We will see if it happens but there has been a trend to doing that in recent years. This year they drafted Paxton a Boras client who will most definatly demand a high bonus. Its never good to see a palyer with as much talent as Rios has leave for nothing, but its made easier knowing that Travis Snider is ready to take his spot and will probably be a much better hitter.
But Snider already had a spot. It's the Bautista-Inglett spot. As for the draft side, this is usually treated as a separate budget from payroll by most teams, and there was every indication that this was how the Jays looked at it, too.
I hope the money saved doesn't get reinvested (at least via the FA market), since as others have stated before, there's not much value out there.
I hope the money saved doesn't get reinvested (at least via the FA market), since as others have stated before, there's not much value out there.
Bastian just tweeted that he thinks Ruiz could be called up, he's speculating mind you.
OK - so Rios is gone and we have no back up CFer - yikes.
Ironically - we might now be forced to sign Scutaro for more years and more money than makes sense. Getting rid of one bad contract may force JP to get into an other. Up to now I've been sure Scutaro is gone - it's his LAST chance to get a REAL contract - and he'll take it. When he does - JP will be skewered anew.
SO - by September 1st we bring up Snider, Dopriak, Sanchez and Coats.
Sanchez - who had been up to KC's 14th Prospect in 2006 - is presently hitting 311/365/437 at AAA. IF JP is not going to get screamed at by the fans - Sanchez is going to have to have a great September so we can forget Scutaro. Coats - is the last and only CFer in the organization - he's hitting 299/360/409/769 with 25 SB and 6 CS at AAA. JP will have to figure out if he can be the backup CFer. If not - then JP has another job this offseason.
As to Rios - I for one hope he grows up and applies more of his substantial natural talent. With the Jays, Rios has sleep walked through his career. Pity - however, were it not for Wells' 98 million dollar clusterf*ck of a contract - he'd still be with the team.
Ironically - we might now be forced to sign Scutaro for more years and more money than makes sense. Getting rid of one bad contract may force JP to get into an other. Up to now I've been sure Scutaro is gone - it's his LAST chance to get a REAL contract - and he'll take it. When he does - JP will be skewered anew.
SO - by September 1st we bring up Snider, Dopriak, Sanchez and Coats.
Sanchez - who had been up to KC's 14th Prospect in 2006 - is presently hitting 311/365/437 at AAA. IF JP is not going to get screamed at by the fans - Sanchez is going to have to have a great September so we can forget Scutaro. Coats - is the last and only CFer in the organization - he's hitting 299/360/409/769 with 25 SB and 6 CS at AAA. JP will have to figure out if he can be the backup CFer. If not - then JP has another job this offseason.
As to Rios - I for one hope he grows up and applies more of his substantial natural talent. With the Jays, Rios has sleep walked through his career. Pity - however, were it not for Wells' 98 million dollar clusterf*ck of a contract - he'd still be with the team.
Wait, I thought players get put on waivers all the time and the media were idiots for making it a story?
What happened to the pre-deadline JP that wanted to pay no freight on Rios AND wanted prospects?
Certainly we've seen nothing from EE that makes anyone think that he's going to produce.
Too bad for Downs he is hurt, otherwise he could have been on his way as well.
Where are Willrain and Jays2010? I'd love to hear how this team competes next year.
What happened to the pre-deadline JP that wanted to pay no freight on Rios AND wanted prospects?
Certainly we've seen nothing from EE that makes anyone think that he's going to produce.
Too bad for Downs he is hurt, otherwise he could have been on his way as well.
Where are Willrain and Jays2010? I'd love to hear how this team competes next year.
Why wouldn't it be Coats that comes up? Are they just going to leave CF open at times, or is Wells going to play every inning of every game?
It's already August 10th. Everyone else can wait until September 1st, you sort of need players on your roster who can man the 9 positions on the field.
It's already August 10th. Everyone else can wait until September 1st, you sort of need players on your roster who can man the 9 positions on the field.
Bautista apparently plays some center field in winter ball.
*sigh* We can't even get excited about tearing it down to rebuild, because we can't realistically rebuild until Wells is off the books.
We're stuck in no-man's land.
We're stuck in no-man's land.
The fans have to boo Wells out of town. If he opts out after 2011, all is saved.
I am surprised not more of you gang are calling this what it is: a straight salary dump. That money is not going back into the team anytime soon - signing draft picks, scouting etc. In any event, it seems like a response to the clear (unspoken) directive to cut payroll. Although it fits in with the JP sell-low mantra, which is a bonus.
Bummer. (the payroll cutting, not Rios leaving).
Bummer. (the payroll cutting, not Rios leaving).
Of course Wells is going to play every inning of every game in center. I think Inglett is plan B, and good.
I like to think about how Rios might have to change by dealing with Ozzie Guillen on a day-to-day basis. I expect Ozzie will make or break him. In other words, Alex will be challenged in ways he wasn't in Toronto. I expect he may never see numbers as bad as 2009 again.
Be done with it. Go Marlin, and aim to win in 2014 or so. Blech.
JP's tenure in Toronto is coming full circle:
Phase I: slash payroll
Phase II: "rolling three-year budgets," big spending, AJ, BJ, Overbay, Vernon, etc.
Phase III: slash payroll
Does this organization have any coherent strategy for building a competitive ballclub? Because if it does, I have no idea what it is. The front office seems to change its philosophy every few weeks, depending on which way the wind is blowing.
Phase I: slash payroll
Phase II: "rolling three-year budgets," big spending, AJ, BJ, Overbay, Vernon, etc.
Phase III: slash payroll
Does this organization have any coherent strategy for building a competitive ballclub? Because if it does, I have no idea what it is. The front office seems to change its philosophy every few weeks, depending on which way the wind is blowing.
http://gameofinches.blogspot.com/2009/08/white-sox-acquire-alex-rioswhy.html
This could be a huge win for JP...
I stopped reading when the guy confused (I hope, never assume malice when...) replacement level and 'average.'
The numbers of course are important but speaking just as a fan who likes the blue jays I'm kind of happy to see Rios go. As a person he lacked charisma and as a player he was really frustrating to watch on the base paths, in the batters box and sometimes in the field. I personally can't recall any moment that made me say out loud and proud -- I'm so glad Alex Rios is a blue jay.
Where are Willrain and Jays2010? I'd love to hear how this team competes next year.
At work...anyway, who thinks sticking Snider in RF and signing Nick Johnson at DH would be better than the combined RF and DH production the Jays have had this year (counting Lind as LF)? I do, even with the downgrade in RF defense. Nick Johnson won't cost the $9.7 mill Rios is making next year. So there...the team improves at the same cost. It is possible.
3B is much tougher I will agree. The Jays need to trade for a young 3B with the upside to hit better than Rolen (Brandon Wood?) because the fielding will be worse.
While at this point I don't see the Jays doing diddly in 2010, I do think it is possible to "reinvest" the Rios/Rolen savings and field a better 2010 team, though the Jays don't look like they will do it.
And Jim...I don't see your point. Once Rolen left, obviously all bets are off. Obviously the Jays look like they are rebuilding - I don't think I ever argued that they could compete in 2010 on a $60 million payroll...
This is how I'd like to see the Rolen/Rios savings "reinvested"
JP: Vernon - I assume you want out of town. However, your contract makes it impossible. So this is our offer: you receive $10 million/yr from 2012-2014 to OPT OUT of your contract after 2011. So, essentially, you will make $74 million for the next 2 years of baseball and at that point you are free to sign with a contender.
VW: Where do I sign?
The real blunder was, completely unnecessarily, giving out the 7-year contract when Rios still had 3 seasons to go before free agency.
When Gillick was GM, he just gave out 1-year contracts until the last year before free agency, going to arbitration if necessary. Then if he wanted to keep the player, he'd make a long-term offer (1 year before any other team could make an offer) and he'd usually be able to keep the player, even though he had another rule of not guaranteeing more than 3 years.
If the Jays had handled Rios this way, they'd be deciding this offseason whether to make Rios their first multi-year offer. If Rios left after 2010, they'd get some draft picks.
Instead, the Jays lose Rios' age 29 year and get no draft picks. This fiasco was self-inflicted.
When Gillick was GM, he just gave out 1-year contracts until the last year before free agency, going to arbitration if necessary. Then if he wanted to keep the player, he'd make a long-term offer (1 year before any other team could make an offer) and he'd usually be able to keep the player, even though he had another rule of not guaranteeing more than 3 years.
If the Jays had handled Rios this way, they'd be deciding this offseason whether to make Rios their first multi-year offer. If Rios left after 2010, they'd get some draft picks.
Instead, the Jays lose Rios' age 29 year and get no draft picks. This fiasco was self-inflicted.
I dunno. I very vividly remember watching a Jays series in Boston where he basically defeated the Red Sox single handedly. That series will always be my fondest memory.
I am very fearful of where the Jays are headed. There is no reason to believe monies will be put back into the team.
Troubling times.
I am very fearful of where the Jays are headed. There is no reason to believe monies will be put back into the team.
Troubling times.
2010
These salary dumps were quite easy to predict, backing off your stance because they moved Rolen is silly because there was no way to field a team at 80 million dollars based on what they had already guaranteed for 2010. Half the reason why the offers to the Jays were so bad at the deadline is because every GM in baseball knows they are screwed.
Wells would never sign that deal. They are going to pay him every cent either in dollars directly or to another team in talent.
These salary dumps were quite easy to predict, backing off your stance because they moved Rolen is silly because there was no way to field a team at 80 million dollars based on what they had already guaranteed for 2010. Half the reason why the offers to the Jays were so bad at the deadline is because every GM in baseball knows they are screwed.
Wells would never sign that deal. They are going to pay him every cent either in dollars directly or to another team in talent.
This could be a huge win for JP...
That article seemed like a classic case of "I have my opinion, and I'm going to look for numbers to back it up." They're just piling on things to try to say 'look, he's falling appart in every way imaginable'. They talk about " In each season since, Rios has seen his wOBA, ISO, BB%, K%, contact rate and defensive production all trend in the wrong direction." His ISO is within .007 of last year. His BB and K %s are virtually the same (6.5 and 17.6 vs 6.6 and 17.9). They mentioned later in the article that he had a career year for defense in 2008... not how that fits on the consistent decline scale. The wOBA? Yup. That's down. So is his BABIP (by 34 points off his career average). If not for that "aberration" of defensive prowess in 2008, "Rios's total Runs Above Average value would reflect his three year skills decline."... Or, if you adjust it down to his career average, would have put him about the same as his 2007 value.
I mean, if they don't want him, that's fine. He's going to frustrate the hell out of them, but it won't be for his actual performance (it'll be for his occasional 'performances' instead). And, really, is anyone who's had Dwayne Wise, Scott Posednik and Brian Anderson all put time in CF have any leg to stand on to complain?
2010
Halladay 16 MM
Ryan 12 MM
Overbay 8 MM
Wells 16 MM
Hill 4 MM
Downs 4 MM
EE 4MM
~64 million spent on a starter, a first baseman, a second baseman, a 'third baseman', an outfielder and a closer.
That leaves ~16 million to spend on 10 pitchers, a shortstop, 2 catchers, 4 outfielders, corner infielder, middle infielder.
Some call it 'doom and gloom', the reality is that this team is about to spend a lot of time in last place.
Call it 20 players at the minimum. That's 8 million. That leaves a grand total of 8 million dollars in marginal salary to spend over 19 roster spots.
Unless JP pulls off the trade of the century for Halladay, how can you build a case that this team could even win 72-75 games?
Halladay 16 MM
Ryan 12 MM
Overbay 8 MM
Wells 16 MM
Hill 4 MM
Downs 4 MM
EE 4MM
~64 million spent on a starter, a first baseman, a second baseman, a 'third baseman', an outfielder and a closer.
That leaves ~16 million to spend on 10 pitchers, a shortstop, 2 catchers, 4 outfielders, corner infielder, middle infielder.
Some call it 'doom and gloom', the reality is that this team is about to spend a lot of time in last place.
Call it 20 players at the minimum. That's 8 million. That leaves a grand total of 8 million dollars in marginal salary to spend over 19 roster spots.
Unless JP pulls off the trade of the century for Halladay, how can you build a case that this team could even win 72-75 games?
These salary dumps were quite easy to predict, backing off your stance because they moved Rolen is silly because there was no way to field a team at 80 million dollars based on what they had already guaranteed for 2010. Half the reason why the offers to the Jays were so bad at the deadline is because every GM in baseball knows they are screwed.
Wells would never sign that deal. They are going to pay him every cent either in dollars directly or to another team in talent.
The VW thing is half sarcasm/half wishful thinking. It won't happen, but I can dream...because I am sure he would like to get out of TO.
Predictable? Since when? This $80 million thing is a fairly recent revelation, is it not? At the beginning of the season and when the team was 27-14 was it "predictable"? Based on my name, I have been suggesting that 2010 was the year for the Jays for quite some time (since the beginning of last year). When did you make this brilliant "prediction"? A few weeks ago? Congratulations. I don't know where you make the connection between my belief that this team could have contended in 2010 a few weeks ago on a $100 mill payroll (apx.) to a suggestion that they can contend on a $60-$80 mill payroll. The payroll was going to rise from 2009 to 2010 for the same 25 man roster no matter what. That's what happens with backloaded contracts when a lot of players are locked up. That's what happens with a backloaded VW deal. I really don't know how Rios being claimed by the White Sox is evidence for your argument, whatever your argument is.
Predictable? Since when? This $80 million thing is a fairly recent revelation, is it not?
Since at least as long as you've been telling me that they were going to compete in 2010 and I kept telling you that was insane. Did you think they were going to take the payroll up with attendance falling and the economy in shambles?
Since at least as long as you've been telling me that they were going to compete in 2010 and I kept telling you that was insane. Did you think they were going to take the payroll up with attendance falling and the economy in shambles?
the economy in shambles?
In fairness, the economy is starting to un-shamble, as had been predicted.
The Jays Best Use of the 60 million saved on Rios
Use the money to Lobby MLB and its member clubs to:
change MLB's divisional structure and scheduling system;
expand or alter the MLB playoff format; and
implement some manner of salary cap.
Some of our recent clubs were playoff calibre in any other division yet we haven't had a sniff of the playoffs in years.
I think it's wonderful how the team is going to save on payroll now. Of course, there's also a revenue side to the equation and how big is the revenue hit going to be when the fanbase sees that the team has no intention of trying to win?
Last January I sat in a big room in the Harbour Castle and listened to Paul Beeston tell the season ticket holders that 2009 would be a building year and they would go for it in 2010. That night and on subsequent occasions he talked about how he relished the opportunity to compete in the AL East and that the resources would be there when needed. Now it seems the idea is to become the Kansas City Royals, Northern Branch. I feel like I've been played for a sucker.
As for the economy, recessions don't last forever, and Rogers is doing very well in spite of it. Where is the long-term vision here?
In fairness, the economy is starting to un-shamble, as had been predicted.
Some places it's better some places haven't bottomed out yet. I spent a few hours today with Moody's economic outlooks for a dozen MSAs in the Northeast for work today (we don't do business in Canada, so none of them were Canadian cities). The Northeast US is going to have one hell of a slow exit from this recession.
There was no point in coming back with the same roster anyway at 100 million. That team wasn't good enough to compete. It wasn't as bad as they are going to be, but if you are going to rebuild you may as well rebuild instead of staying in 77-85 win purgatory.
There was never any way that the team was going to compete in 2010. The roster wasn't good enough and there was no way to fix it that quickly. What you got from Riccardi and friends was marketing spin. They knew they needed everything to go right to even sniff the playoffs.
This outrage should have come on deadline day when we didn't deal Doc or Scutaro, that was a colossal blunder.
The Rios move, which viewed independently is defensibile as a pure baseball decision. is only painful because it clearly exposes all the previous 2010 talk as pure blather.
Let's pray Doc gets through the season healthy. Scutaro is now worth only the compensatory picks.
OK. It is final. I officially want JP out of fired. There's no way that pre-deadline he couldn't have got SOME return on Rios.
As was quoted from a blog in another thread to paraphrase. "Rios isn't a player you dump but a player under a cheap contract relative to performance that one builds around."
This is a disgusting move. If they were going to do this, they ought to have done the Halladay deal. They ought to have dealt Scutaro for whatever they could get. I doubt the doom sayers who say this team will be in last place are correct (the Orioles don't impress me their pitch prospects are less worthy than the Jays and Wieters seems more hype and a worse hitter than Snider).
Cheering for a team has essentially been cheering for a set of pajamas with a revolving set of players in them. Not that Rios was the heart of this team or anything but in 06/07 he was a joy to watch.
There will be more nights of mlb.tv on my laptop, using the AT Bat app to listen to other team but w/o the Jays on the television as well... there absolutely NO WAY that JP can convince me that this was a good move for the team and that in the long term the Jays will be better for it. It is all cost cutting... after spending a decade in 3rd place (with one last and one 2nd of course), say hello to a decade of 4th.
As was quoted from a blog in another thread to paraphrase. "Rios isn't a player you dump but a player under a cheap contract relative to performance that one builds around."
This is a disgusting move. If they were going to do this, they ought to have done the Halladay deal. They ought to have dealt Scutaro for whatever they could get. I doubt the doom sayers who say this team will be in last place are correct (the Orioles don't impress me their pitch prospects are less worthy than the Jays and Wieters seems more hype and a worse hitter than Snider).
Cheering for a team has essentially been cheering for a set of pajamas with a revolving set of players in them. Not that Rios was the heart of this team or anything but in 06/07 he was a joy to watch.
There will be more nights of mlb.tv on my laptop, using the AT Bat app to listen to other team but w/o the Jays on the television as well... there absolutely NO WAY that JP can convince me that this was a good move for the team and that in the long term the Jays will be better for it. It is all cost cutting... after spending a decade in 3rd place (with one last and one 2nd of course), say hello to a decade of 4th.
Ricciardi mentioned several times how the economy played out in making this deal. Maybe, and this could be wishful thinking, he was referring to competition in free agents next year? If his people believe that this season will be even more of a buyers market (now that teams like the Indians are really coming to grips with losing big money) teams are less likely to dish out money. If Abreu and Burrell go for 1 year, 5 million, and this year is MORE of a buyer's market, that 10 million saved on Rios could go a very long way.
You have Snider, Lind, and wells all capable of playing the outfield (I said capable, not great). It's much easier to acquire a first baseman, DH type with Rios' saved money than it is to replace Rios. You also have the ability to take on salary in this regard-and plenty of teams will be looking to dump salary.
Again, I'd like to see how the offseason goes before passing judgement.
No word yet as to whether Rios, when headed for Seattle where the White Sox are playing, took a lazy route to the city, heading off towards Denver before overrunning Seattle and ending up in Vancouver, where he promptly threw his luggage back home - or close to it as it tailed off towards Tacoma.
Since Vernon is immovable, this more or less had to happen. There's no point keeping a guy at that contract level if the team in inherently uncompetitive. Sad but true. Save the money you can, pay more for draft picks, and look to build around a core of young pitching.
Maybe we can boo Vernon out of town, and let the rebuilding begin...
Maybe we can boo Vernon out of town, and let the rebuilding begin...
I agree with Newton. The real problem this team is suffering from (if payroll is truly tied to revenue) is that this city has realized the BS of having to compete with both the sox and Yanks. People love baseball but they won't support a hopeless cause- so attendance is dwindling. I truly believe that a move to the AL Central would result in a 20% attendance bump immediately, possibly more.
Unfortunately nobody outside of the Rays and O's give a damn about our predicament so I don't see MLB doing anything. What Rogers should really do is sell the team to an ownership that's looking to move and then buy the Royals... An absolutely ridiculous proposal, but it seems to more plausible than getting 27 other teams to choose competitive balance.
I am happy to say the team showed more backbone than they have in a while...
I think this move pretty much guarantees that JP comes back this year. This is clearly dictated by management, and they don't have JP make this move unless he's back next year.
Despite this move, which I think is terrible, I'm still fine with the Jays not trading Halladay. Just because you're rebuilding doesn't mean you have to give up your players for nothing.
Despite this move, which I think is terrible, I'm still fine with the Jays not trading Halladay. Just because you're rebuilding doesn't mean you have to give up your players for nothing.
Are we blaming the Rios contract on Godfrey/Rogers as well? If so, sure, great job by JP to shed payroll and dump a player whose value has never been lower. Otherwise, all he did was solve a problem that he himself created.
I'm so frustrated with this team right now. I don't even have the words.
JP has to go, even if it's a scapegoat move. I don't care. Just fire him. Please.
I like what Denoit is saying. In my opinion, "moneyball" built baseball teams are mediocre at best. Those Oakland teams played in a poor division and never really won anything when push came to shove. I think the Jays are realizing that in order to compete in this division they're going to need to invest heavily in blue-chip prospects with higher risk reward. Elite homegrown players are needed. This of course will take time, but I believe the Blue Jays have caught on. They've become players in the international signing period, they now draft more high school players, and have at least begun to look at high bonus demanding college players, albeit Canadian ones. Players like Adam Lind, Aaron Hill, Vernon Wells will bridge the gap and play an important part in the future. I know everyone has immediately begun to look to Travis Snider to fill the void left by Alex Rios. I think he certainly will and then some, but I do not think his future lies in right field. I think management made this move also because it must really believe that the majority of Alex Rios' contract, the ladder two or three years, players like Yohermyn Chavez and Moises Sierra will be ready to play at the big league level. So I do hope that when JP talks about "financial flexibility" he has one eye on the future and not both on the upcoming offseason.
Unless JP pulls off the trade of the century for Halladay, how can you build a case that this team could even win 72-75 games?
Jim, I'll take the Jays +73.5 for 2010. How much you in for?
Jim, I'll take the Jays +73.5 for 2010. How much you in for?
Unless he starts playing again like they thought he would when they signed him to this deal, Rios isn't worth $12 million a year. I don't think he will. If they can get players who are worth $12 million a year with the money this helps the team. If they can't, it doesn't. Let's see what they do with the money.
It disappoints me to hear JP say that the most pressing needs of the team are SS and C. I think they need a big bat for 1B or DH or OF.
Jim, I'll take the Jays +73.5 for 2010. How much you in for?
I'm in for $20 as long as we can agree that the bet is off if Rogers sells the team before January.
Where are Willrain and Jays2010? I'd love to hear how this team competes next year.
Rare as it is for me, I actually had a chance to make a few dollars today.
the answer to your question is - they don't. The case for contending was always predicated on the talent that was here. I rule that out now unless there are some astounding trades made because there's nothing on the FA market that solves all the problems.
However...
Halladay 16 MM
Ryan 12 MM
Overbay 8 MM
Wells 16 MM
Hill 4 MM
Downs 4 MM
EE 4MM
Where do you get your figures? 4 of those figures are completely wrong. And your total is, in fact, too low. It's actually 66.5 using their actual salaries.
But my guess is this is the first match (or Rolen was) in a pretty massive fire sale.
doc will definately be gone, so will Downs and Overbay if they can find anyone who'll take at least 4 million of that 7 on. They'll trade EE if they can and non-tender Bautista (if they are sane) and trade Frasor and probably Tallet.
they'll also spend the next 3 (at least) seasons in last place following the Tampa model for success.
It's also just gotten a lot more likely the team gets sold and that's what the cutting is about.
I'd love to be proven wrong by seeing money poured into the team this offseason - I'd love for it to simply be a matter of being fed-up with Bimbo Rios. But I'm not going to argue from that position until I see it happen.
My working thesis right now is that we're in a hard dive to the bottom.
which, frankly, I'm ok with if they'll just pick a direction and stick with it.
By the way, While I'm posting, for all the "real blunder" observations in this thread, the critical mistake was signing Wells to that deal, no doubt, but there are so many other forces at work there (Godfrey's influance, market reversals, etc)_ that I mark that observation up to 90% hindsight. but laying that aside, the REAL mistake here, and the thing I'll put right at the top of my list of reasons why it's time for JP to be pushed out - no one in the organization had the guts to take Wells out of CF.
Everything that happened surrounding Rios - IMO - derives from the fact that the Jays minimize the value of their two most expensive hitters because they don't have the stones to state the obvious to Wells.
what did they think wouldf happen, he'd get mad and stop hitting?
Rare as it is for me, I actually had a chance to make a few dollars today.
the answer to your question is - they don't. The case for contending was always predicated on the talent that was here. I rule that out now unless there are some astounding trades made because there's nothing on the FA market that solves all the problems.
However...
Halladay 16 MM
Ryan 12 MM
Overbay 8 MM
Wells 16 MM
Hill 4 MM
Downs 4 MM
EE 4MM
Where do you get your figures? 4 of those figures are completely wrong. And your total is, in fact, too low. It's actually 66.5 using their actual salaries.
But my guess is this is the first match (or Rolen was) in a pretty massive fire sale.
doc will definately be gone, so will Downs and Overbay if they can find anyone who'll take at least 4 million of that 7 on. They'll trade EE if they can and non-tender Bautista (if they are sane) and trade Frasor and probably Tallet.
they'll also spend the next 3 (at least) seasons in last place following the Tampa model for success.
It's also just gotten a lot more likely the team gets sold and that's what the cutting is about.
I'd love to be proven wrong by seeing money poured into the team this offseason - I'd love for it to simply be a matter of being fed-up with Bimbo Rios. But I'm not going to argue from that position until I see it happen.
My working thesis right now is that we're in a hard dive to the bottom.
which, frankly, I'm ok with if they'll just pick a direction and stick with it.
By the way, While I'm posting, for all the "real blunder" observations in this thread, the critical mistake was signing Wells to that deal, no doubt, but there are so many other forces at work there (Godfrey's influance, market reversals, etc)_ that I mark that observation up to 90% hindsight. but laying that aside, the REAL mistake here, and the thing I'll put right at the top of my list of reasons why it's time for JP to be pushed out - no one in the organization had the guts to take Wells out of CF.
Everything that happened surrounding Rios - IMO - derives from the fact that the Jays minimize the value of their two most expensive hitters because they don't have the stones to state the obvious to Wells.
what did they think wouldf happen, he'd get mad and stop hitting?
I'm in for $20 as long as we can agree that the bet is off if Rogers sells the team before January.
Nope, no caveats.
First one to take Jays -73.5 against my +73.5 for 2010 with no strings attached over the next 24 hours has a bet for a pair of 100-level outfields in 2011 (or 2010 after the Jays' 74th win). I'll follow up with the admins to seal the deal via e-mail.
Nope, no caveats.
First one to take Jays -73.5 against my +73.5 for 2010 with no strings attached over the next 24 hours has a bet for a pair of 100-level outfields in 2011 (or 2010 after the Jays' 74th win). I'll follow up with the admins to seal the deal via e-mail.
The Blue Jays showed character by beating the Yankees in New York, tonight. The bullpen was outstanding; a deserved win for Shawn Camp. The 12 pitch Posada strikeout by Carlson was a classic battle.
Rios' salary dump was a shock, but he had a regression that was evident right from his games with Puerto Rico this spring. Maybe the change in scenery will do him good, certainly he deserves the opportunity to play his natural position. If JP engineered the contract he should be fired, if he didn't then cut him loose after 2010. He'll be happier doing something for the Red Sox.
In fairness, the economy is starting to un-shamble, as had been predicted.
Don't drink the kool-aid. Unless Canada can get on fine while the U.S. is a train wreck, it's going to get much much worse before it gets better.
Virtually every single move being made by the U.S. government in the past year has been the sort of moves a wise man would make if he were TRYING to make things worse.
Don't drink the kool-aid. Unless Canada can get on fine while the U.S. is a train wreck, it's going to get much much worse before it gets better.
Virtually every single move being made by the U.S. government in the past year has been the sort of moves a wise man would make if he were TRYING to make things worse.
It looks like this team is not attempting to contend...but I doubt the team sucks to the point of following Tampa's model. Even if the team is mostly down to the bare bones (i.e. Wells, Hill, Lind, Snider, the young & cheap pitchers and possibly JPA/Dopirak) along with whatever Halladay brings back in return, it seems like there is enough to hover in the 75-80 win group which won't have a top 5 pick. The team would probably cost around $60 million and perhaps in 2 or 3 years go for contending again.
While I am not betting on it or suggesting it is the best way to go, I would not be totally shocked if they do actually "reallocate" funds (in the form of one or two year contracts) and attempt to contend in 2010. The Jays, so far, have downgraded 3B and RF, but DH is likely to improve with Snider (though he'll likely play RF), catcher can improve through free agency and 3B and RF could be resolved through free agency as well (i.e. Beltre or Tejada for 3B, Nick Johnson as DH). If Scutaro is resigned, is Beltre, Nick Johnson and Snider a downgrade from Rolen, Rios and Millar (or the alternative crappy DH)? Would it cost any more money? Not saying this is likely (or even a longshot)...just saying that it is possible to have made these moves, improved the farm system (through the Rolen trade) and still acquire replacements on short term deals to give the Jays as good of a chance to contend in 2010 as they had before (whether one thinks they had a chance or not is irrelevant). Not to mention the long term financial flexibility that these move creates.
I always figured Shawn Camp would make a great ROOGY. I might have been wrong. I also definitely never saw him as a multi-inning lockdown artist. I was definitely wrong about that. Great googly moogly.
Not sure what the Jays are doing, but then again, I've never really been sure what their plan was. Cut salary and then make a wild attempt at going for it by signing a bunch of second-tier veterans? It's hard not to see this team in last place over the next few years but still at around the 70-75 win mark which means they wouldn't get a top draft pick.
He makes me leave the room when he pitches (just because I know what could happen - when he loses it, it's the second-most ugly sequence in baseball next to a bad League inning). Of course, he should be cheap again next year, so I'll buy a bottle of tums and hope he can soak up innings like they soak up acid.
"I feel like I've been played for a sucker" ... Frank Markotich @ 10:06 PM ---- Just think how Alex Rios views it
J.P. Ricciardi delivered the news and said Rios was caught by surprise.
"He's been a Blue Jay his whole life," Ricciardi said. "He's a good kid and I just think he was shocked. He probably thought he was going to stay here for the rest of his life..."
So much for loyalty... so much for the concept of TEAM , of tradition ... who else is going under the bus ... Watch out Roy, watch out Aaron -- who knew that the light you saw at the end of the tunnel was actually a Greyhound
Ricciardi said that allowing Rios to be claimed by the Sox was not strictly a salary dump. "That's not the message that we're trying to send here," Ricciardi said. "What we are trying to send ..." -- ( IMO)... to get the real meaning just substitute the word "Spin" for 'send' ... and if you thought that it was difficult to get free agents to sign here before when Toronto had a good reputation as an organization getting "out from under a contract" perhaps isn't the best way to characterize this move ...
Also, I didn't quite understand that when Beeston said that they would be putting more emphasis/resources on building the team through the draft that they would be racing towards the bottom to secure the top draft selections for years to come
Also, I don't quite understand how 'booing' Vernon Wells to get him out of Toronto is in any way helpful other than to legitimize Boomer Wells' contention that Toronto baseball fans 'don't understand baseball' . Just because we have bush league management and ownership doesn't mean we should stoop to their pitiful level of operations.
And speaking of ownership to whom our scorn and ire should really be directed... if the penny pinching bottom feeding beancounters at Rogers had any sense of the value that they truly have in the Blue Jays then they would realize how perilously close they tread to another "negative sales marketing" fiasco . They are tarnishing their Blue Jay logo which has created a lot of leeway in the public perception of Rogers
Finally, thankfully to end this RANT... A telling observation from a friend (who fits to a tee the casual baseball fan/customer that the Jays market to) He said "jeesh (sp?) , the Blue Jays are becoming as bad as the Leafs"
I SINCERELY HOPE NOT!
Blair has a new column, doesn't sound pleased with the move, and he speculates this may be a precursor to selling the Jays.
While I'm not happy about the Rios dump, I don't think it's too dumb either. Rios has to bounce back to his previous all-star level or salaries have to drastically increase again for his contract to be a steal. In all other scenarios, he is roughly worth what he is paid. But if that's true, why should anyone send something back?
And from the Jays standpoint, while clearly this is a sell-low, it may help to improve their bargaining position in the off-season. At this point, they have cleared enough money not having to sell anymore. Of course, they may still want to, but they are not forced to which should help in negotiations. Finally, even with Rios gone, they may still go the "we contend route", if only to sell tickets b/c no one bought their assets at decent prices. With Halladay, the rotation projects to be fine. The bullpen is set as well. Outfield: Wells, Snider, Lind - bad defense, but likely solid offense. Infield: EE, Hill, Overbay/Dopirak. Need: C, SS. DH, Bench.
Can the Jays get that with their budget? Well, there are 2 possibilities for the off-season.
1. The market rebounds. Then the Jays will be sellers. Overbay's contract won't looks so bad. They won't be able to afford Scudaro and they gave up too early on Rios.
2. The market is down another year: Then no one will buy what the Jays want to sell, but the Jays can buy. Scudero can be resigned at a reasonable rate. Some DH will fall our way and finding a bench for little money won't be too hard.
Which one is it going to be? I don't know. And I can even see that the Jays don't know. But with the Rolen and Rios trades, they have set them up for either situation. Only they would be weaker contenders than they could be -- just a little tease, not enough to keep Roy.
And from the Jays standpoint, while clearly this is a sell-low, it may help to improve their bargaining position in the off-season. At this point, they have cleared enough money not having to sell anymore. Of course, they may still want to, but they are not forced to which should help in negotiations. Finally, even with Rios gone, they may still go the "we contend route", if only to sell tickets b/c no one bought their assets at decent prices. With Halladay, the rotation projects to be fine. The bullpen is set as well. Outfield: Wells, Snider, Lind - bad defense, but likely solid offense. Infield: EE, Hill, Overbay/Dopirak. Need: C, SS. DH, Bench.
Can the Jays get that with their budget? Well, there are 2 possibilities for the off-season.
1. The market rebounds. Then the Jays will be sellers. Overbay's contract won't looks so bad. They won't be able to afford Scudaro and they gave up too early on Rios.
2. The market is down another year: Then no one will buy what the Jays want to sell, but the Jays can buy. Scudero can be resigned at a reasonable rate. Some DH will fall our way and finding a bench for little money won't be too hard.
Which one is it going to be? I don't know. And I can even see that the Jays don't know. But with the Rolen and Rios trades, they have set them up for either situation. Only they would be weaker contenders than they could be -- just a little tease, not enough to keep Roy.
There are no funds to "reallocate"
the currently committed contracts add up to $66.5 million and fill 6 roster spots.
League minimum for 19 other players is 7.6 that leaves less than $10 million between what they currently HAVE to spend next year and the 2009 payroll
and even that is ignoring the fact that Frasor, Tallet, Accardo, Camp, League, McGowan, Janssen, Marcum, and Bautista are eligible for arbitration. You can (and probably should) trade Tallet and Frasor and probably Camp, and non-tender Bautista but we have to have some of those guys. Give each of the other guys an average of a half-million over the minimum (which is what Accardo got for 2009) and you just went through 1/4 of that "spare" $10 million.
and to do that, that means SS, LF, and C are maned by league minimum players (MyLegacy might get his angel Sanchez dream yet!)
Of course there will be further trades, money saved and players imported - but I'm talking about right now. Even if you plug in recimation projects in the openings (Give Barret another go, for instance, and sign Khalil Greene and Coco Crisp...just for an example) you are gonna end up right around the $80-85 million mark.
So no, unless Rogers decides to open up the checkbook beyond what they did this year - significantly beyond - there's no mad money to spend.
the currently committed contracts add up to $66.5 million and fill 6 roster spots.
League minimum for 19 other players is 7.6 that leaves less than $10 million between what they currently HAVE to spend next year and the 2009 payroll
and even that is ignoring the fact that Frasor, Tallet, Accardo, Camp, League, McGowan, Janssen, Marcum, and Bautista are eligible for arbitration. You can (and probably should) trade Tallet and Frasor and probably Camp, and non-tender Bautista but we have to have some of those guys. Give each of the other guys an average of a half-million over the minimum (which is what Accardo got for 2009) and you just went through 1/4 of that "spare" $10 million.
and to do that, that means SS, LF, and C are maned by league minimum players (MyLegacy might get his angel Sanchez dream yet!)
Of course there will be further trades, money saved and players imported - but I'm talking about right now. Even if you plug in recimation projects in the openings (Give Barret another go, for instance, and sign Khalil Greene and Coco Crisp...just for an example) you are gonna end up right around the $80-85 million mark.
So no, unless Rogers decides to open up the checkbook beyond what they did this year - significantly beyond - there's no mad money to spend.
White Sox claim Jays' Rios off waivers ... from Chicago's MLB page .
"Williams said the waiver claim was made as a way of opening trade talks -- which Williams had engaged the Blue Jays in prior to the July 31 non-waiver Trade Deadline..." uuhm. I didn't get that sense from Ricciardi's press conference .
" The Blue Jays chose to let Rios go as a way of shedding salary -- something that surprised Williams, who was expecting to have to work out a trade for him ..." obviously Kenny Williams didn't get the script from J.P. or maybe in a co$t $aving measure the Blue Jays sent it by USPS. They should get it by Wednesday. While I guess it is encouraging that the White Sox had absolutely nothing in their system that might help the Jays. Not even a bucket of balls...
J.P. did ask, didn't he ?
I am only shocked that I somehow missed the news that Jeffrey Loria had bought the Jays.....
Blair has a new column, doesn't sound pleased with the move, and he speculates this may be a precursor to selling the Jays.
Sometimes I think Blair is way off base but his longstanding speculation about the team being prepared for sale would - if true - bring a lot of otherwise mystifying actions into focus.
I also agree with his implication - and I'll state it again openly because it's my favorite bone to chew on right now - a lot of what was wrong with the way this team was put together arises from the point that the decesion makers let Wells contract blind them to the moves that need to be made.
It's the classic flawed thinking that "we're paying him like a clean-up hitter and a center fielder. Fine. But he's neither. Bat him 6 or 7 and put him in LF and wash your hands of it and move on.
Rios at his production rate and salary are golden if he's a centerfielder, (and, by the way, hitting at the top of the order so he can use his speed, even if his OBP isn't ever perfect) as just about every analysis has shown.
But then, if ownership wasn't going to let the payroll go up, it wasn't going to matter anyway.
I'm just resigning myself to the fact that the Jays don't have the proper ownership situation to compete. If I just relax to that and enjoy watching the kids develop and don't get my hopes up, I'll be alright. I'm not caught up in the whole mindset that the game is only enjoyable if you win it all.
The thing that frusterates me isn't not winning a championship, it's not winning as much as you legitimately should. If the 2010 Jays have .500 talent I can live with that if they actually play .500 ball.
or whatever. But I'm sick of having .580 talent anf playing .510 ball (or whatever, I'm just illustrating here) - THAT gets under my skin a lot more than counting the years since '93
Sometimes I think Blair is way off base but his longstanding speculation about the team being prepared for sale would - if true - bring a lot of otherwise mystifying actions into focus.
I also agree with his implication - and I'll state it again openly because it's my favorite bone to chew on right now - a lot of what was wrong with the way this team was put together arises from the point that the decesion makers let Wells contract blind them to the moves that need to be made.
It's the classic flawed thinking that "we're paying him like a clean-up hitter and a center fielder. Fine. But he's neither. Bat him 6 or 7 and put him in LF and wash your hands of it and move on.
Rios at his production rate and salary are golden if he's a centerfielder, (and, by the way, hitting at the top of the order so he can use his speed, even if his OBP isn't ever perfect) as just about every analysis has shown.
But then, if ownership wasn't going to let the payroll go up, it wasn't going to matter anyway.
I'm just resigning myself to the fact that the Jays don't have the proper ownership situation to compete. If I just relax to that and enjoy watching the kids develop and don't get my hopes up, I'll be alright. I'm not caught up in the whole mindset that the game is only enjoyable if you win it all.
The thing that frusterates me isn't not winning a championship, it's not winning as much as you legitimately should. If the 2010 Jays have .500 talent I can live with that if they actually play .500 ball.
or whatever. But I'm sick of having .580 talent anf playing .510 ball (or whatever, I'm just illustrating here) - THAT gets under my skin a lot more than counting the years since '93
Jgadfly, booing helps by making Vernon opt out of his contract after 2011.
http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2005/01/toronto-blue-jays_05.html
That would save the Jays >60 million dollars over 3 seasons. The team would only have to commit 30 million over the next two seasons and not kill their chances of contending until he is off the books.
Brent, just stop. He's not opting out of a 63m guarantee over 3 years just because he doesn't like the way fans receive him.
Brent ... Aren't you up awfully late or are you still on vacation ? Booing your home team never helps. Cheering them on does.
Wells doesn't deserve to be booed. He was offered a contract and he accepted it in good faith.
Ricciardi doesn't deserve to be booed (maybe fired yes) but he's only following orders and doing his owners bidding.
Beeston doesn't deserve to be booed, he really didn't want to be there in the first place.
If you want to boo somebody , then choose someone deserving , like Rogers
From what I understand, all "trade" talk for Rios involved picking up some of Alex's salary. This would not have been a good thing. That $10m (per se) of retained salary expense would be better spent on the Draft and International FA's than anything available from the White Sox' farm system.
I'm wondering what the next whammy will be. If they end up signing a number of draft picks over slot, that will go a long way in appeasing knowledgeable fans over the "reallocation" of funds. On the other hand, if they don't sign Paxson, Barrett and Marisnick, all hell breaks loose.
I don't think we have anything much at all to worry about on signing draft picks and I'm puzzled it gets so much comment. I'm, just a TINY bit concerned about Paxton but not at all on the rest of the high picks.
they'll be signed.
Looking around the league at the underappreciated guys - I wonder what it would take to land Josh Willingham?
(whom we should have been in on last winter, as we should have on Swisher)
Another wild and crazy idea, if we're just writing off defense all over the field anyway (apparently) then why not bring back Felipe Lopez and see if Butter can teach him how to play SS right?
;)
they'll be signed.
Looking around the league at the underappreciated guys - I wonder what it would take to land Josh Willingham?
(whom we should have been in on last winter, as we should have on Swisher)
Another wild and crazy idea, if we're just writing off defense all over the field anyway (apparently) then why not bring back Felipe Lopez and see if Butter can teach him how to play SS right?
;)
Like it's my fault the team is in the position it is in. Maybe if we started listen to some other voices things would change. Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is madness is how the saying goes, right?
Anyway, I am the one who thinks he will be better next year after he has had full injury recovery time (although I know some think he just needs to stay out of the Dome).
Where do you get your figures? 4 of those figures are completely wrong. And your total is, in fact, too low. It's actually 66.5 using their actual salaries.
They are from Cot's and rounded off. If your contention delusion was based on the current players how could you not see that they couldn't bring those players back without taking salary through the roof and they were never doing that? Not that it mattered anyway as bringing back the same players a year older wasn't going to make any difference.
Mike,
I'll take whatever bet you want to make. Without Halladay they wouldn't have won 74 games this year.
Fairly certain the thought process on those two was:
Scutaro - we can get more value out of having him for the rest of the year with nobody else to play SS, and collect 2 1st rounders.
Halladay - we were offered crap packages for him and will deal him in the offseason when all teams are willing to bid on him.
Scutaro - we can get more value out of having him for the rest of the year with nobody else to play SS, and collect 2 1st rounders.
Halladay - we were offered crap packages for him and will deal him in the offseason when all teams are willing to bid on him.
I agree with the general consensus that this doesn't look good. The Jays face an uncertain - and probably inexpensive and relatively win-free - future. Especially if they deal Doc in the offseason: the Jays could wind up with Wells, Hill, Lind, and 22 anonymous low-wage serfs. There won't be much problem getting good seats at Ted's Shed next year!
This is unfashionable of me, but I actually want to say some good things about Vernon while I'm here. He's wildly overpaid, of course, but that's not his fault: should he have turned down the money? And he isn't fielding as well as he used to, thanks to aging, but it's not like he isn't trying. (Anybody who breaks his wrist diving for a fly ball, as Wells did last year, is trying hard enough.)
Also consider:
Look: it's not his fault that everyone has expected him to hit like Carlos Delgado, field like Devon White, be a team leader like Derek Jeter, and possibly bend steel with his bare hands while he's at it. All you can ask of a ballplayer is that he do his best to stay in shape and try to win, and Wells seems to be doing that. Because of his contract, we're stuck with him for years, unless the Jays release him; let's all make the best of it.
This is unfashionable of me, but I actually want to say some good things about Vernon while I'm here. He's wildly overpaid, of course, but that's not his fault: should he have turned down the money? And he isn't fielding as well as he used to, thanks to aging, but it's not like he isn't trying. (Anybody who breaks his wrist diving for a fly ball, as Wells did last year, is trying hard enough.)
Also consider:
- He hit .300, and on a 30-HR pace, as recently as last year.
- He's 14 for 16 in stolen bases - which means that he's obviously made an effort to improve that part of his game.
- He hasn't made an error all year, if the Baseball Reference page for him is to be believed.
- He's now played almost exactly the same number of games that he did last year, and has only two fewer extra-base hits (though he does have eight fewer homers; he's got five more doubles and one more triple).
Look: it's not his fault that everyone has expected him to hit like Carlos Delgado, field like Devon White, be a team leader like Derek Jeter, and possibly bend steel with his bare hands while he's at it. All you can ask of a ballplayer is that he do his best to stay in shape and try to win, and Wells seems to be doing that. Because of his contract, we're stuck with him for years, unless the Jays release him; let's all make the best of it.
The Cot's numbers from the summary page are luxury tax figures, which prorate signing bonuses across the life of the contract. If you look at the annual figures, the 66.5 MM figure for 2010 is bang on. IMO, that is the number you need to use for payroll planning purposes, not the luxury tax number. The Jays develop enough cheap pitching that they will never be KC/PIT awful, but it is going to be difficult to sign another 19 players for only 13.5 MM.
The good: They have a lot of young pitching (Romero, Cecil, Zep, Purcey) and hitting (Lind, Snider) that is still not arbitration eligible, which will help. Marcum is Arb1, but he should be cheap coming off TJ surgery.
The bad: 4 of the Jays key relievers are arbitration eligible and are in line for raises (Frasor, Camp, Tallet, League). I think some of those guys will be non-tendered. Scutaro and Barajas will likely be somewhere else next year.
Scooter has earned a big pay day, and at 33 years of age, really needs to cash in on his career year. Toronto cannot afford him unless he agrees to a big discount. Would Scutaro accept a 4/20 deal? Would they Jays be foolish to offer that to him? Probably, but he has been so great this year, and replacing his production is going to be tough. It might actually make sense to keep him if he does not demand a ridiculous contract.
JP was not lying at the press conference last night. The top offseason priority will be finding decent solutions for the SS and C positions. And they need some money to do that. Whatever money is left over at that will decide how many relievers will be resigned. The bullpen could be a bit of a mess in 2010.
The good: They have a lot of young pitching (Romero, Cecil, Zep, Purcey) and hitting (Lind, Snider) that is still not arbitration eligible, which will help. Marcum is Arb1, but he should be cheap coming off TJ surgery.
The bad: 4 of the Jays key relievers are arbitration eligible and are in line for raises (Frasor, Camp, Tallet, League). I think some of those guys will be non-tendered. Scutaro and Barajas will likely be somewhere else next year.
Scooter has earned a big pay day, and at 33 years of age, really needs to cash in on his career year. Toronto cannot afford him unless he agrees to a big discount. Would Scutaro accept a 4/20 deal? Would they Jays be foolish to offer that to him? Probably, but he has been so great this year, and replacing his production is going to be tough. It might actually make sense to keep him if he does not demand a ridiculous contract.
JP was not lying at the press conference last night. The top offseason priority will be finding decent solutions for the SS and C positions. And they need some money to do that. Whatever money is left over at that will decide how many relievers will be resigned. The bullpen could be a bit of a mess in 2010.
I'll take whatever bet you want to make.
Then it's done. I'll be in touch. I'm very confident that I bought low.
Then it's done. I'll be in touch. I'm very confident that I bought low.
And people need to stop saying Encarnacion is useless. He was a 800 OPS hitter from 2006 to 2008 at the ages of 23-25. More than likely, he is going to hit like that in 2010, as long as his wrist is healed up. Possibly better if he has a typical late 20's performance spike like most players do. His defense is not nearly as bad as advertised. He's very athletic, and has a great glove and a strong arm. His problem is that heairmails too many throws. That problem is fixable.
4.75 MM for "potential" is a little expensive, but I think Encarnacion is going to be just fine.
4.75 MM for "potential" is a little expensive, but I think Encarnacion is going to be just fine.
Best comment that has been written on Wells in a long time. Well put.
The doom-and-gloomers are gleeful, but this is exactly what they wanted: the blowing up of the Jays, the surrender of short-term hopes, the rebuilding with young cheap players. So now we'll find out if they are right or wrong. The pressure is all on the doom-and-gloomers now -- produce results or admit you were wrong. If the Jays don't follow the Rays and make the World Series within a few short years, their ideas were wrong.
Nobody should blame Ricciardi for any of this -- it's obvious now that all of this is a Rogers corporate decision to slash payroll. All of the criticism of Ricciardi for the past 18 months was misdirected. He has been handcuffed by Rogers. No free agents, no big contracts, no gambles, nothing but typical Canadian corporate conservatism.
In fact, I'll go further and say that the decline of the Jays is a product of typically Canadian corporate thinking: timidity, cowardice and greed. Enjoy your monopoly profits from your government connections, but don't take a chance on investing money in anything if you don't need to. (Labatt, in retrospect, was a rare exception to this pattern.) As a Canadian who lives overseas, I see many examples of how Canadian corporations (compared to those of other countries) are far more timid and unwilling to invest in anything that carries the slightest risk.
If the owners had been willing to invest even $10 or $20 million in a couple of free-agent hitters in 2008 or 2009, the Jays would have had a chance at the playoffs. Ricciardi has done an amazing job of finding cheap players on the scrapheap, but he has little chance of bringing the Jays into the playoffs when his budget is half or a third of the Yankees and Sox budgets. Yes, I know the occasional team has miraculously done it, but it's simply not fair or realistic to expect Ricciardi to do it without a bit of help from the owners. Instead of giving him help, they're giving him cement shoes and dropping him in Lake Ontario.
And by the way, there is no "reallocation" of funds. Anyone who thinks that the savings from Rios will be invested in free agents is living in cloud-cuckoo land. Ricciardi is contractually required to say that the dumping of Rios will help the team, but nobody should be stupid enough to believe him. This is a salary dump, pure and simple. Rolen is dumped, Rios is dumped, Halladay is nearly dumped, and we're expected to believe that this is a BASEBALL decision? Of course not, it's a corporate decision. Cut costs and boost the short-term profits, so that Rogers can please their shareholders -- or so that Rogers can profit by selling the team. That's what it is, and nobody should imagine that this will somehow help the team on the field. Or do we really think that Ruiz is superior to Rios? Or that the Jays would never be able to sign their drafted players if they didn't dump Rios and Rolen?
It wasn't that the Jays COULDN'T sign their drafted players. It was that with the Rios money on the books, there was concern that they WOULDN'T.
CF, I never once said they were ever going to win because they blew it up. I was just predicting that's what would happen. They would one heck of a job by the GM to finish any higher then fourth between now and 2014.
It might not be JP's fault that he's not getting the money to work with many of us thought he was going to a couple of years ago (when 100-110 million/year payroll seemed like the plan), but I'm still hoping he gets fired in the offseason. It's bad form for anyone in his position to get to do a tear down and rebuild twice, without any p(l)ayoff in between. As a corporation, you would think Rogers would know this.
As one who tends to the doomer side, I am not gleeful that the Jays are clearly cutting payroll at this point and seemingly forcing the offloading of more salary in the offseason. Only Yankee/RedSox/Rays/Orioles fans should be happy about this turn of events as a worse team in Canada means more wins for them and an easier division. But from the breakdowns many have gone through, the Jays can barely keep their 2009 payroll and field a team next year, even after Rios was dumped (note to TSN/Sportsnet - he wasn't traded please stop calling it that, he was waived and another team took him).
One further note on some of the analyses floating around on fangraphs/hardballtimes which assign salary value for wins above average, typically finding players like Rios are worth about what he was being paid. I don't think a lot of these actually apply anymore. In a contracting economy, players (and their associated win values) aren't worth as much, and I don't think the analyses are able to figure out the new values yet. Pro sports have expanded at massive rates, far exceeding inflation/GDP, for decades in terms of revenue and salaries. This cannot continue indefinitely, and I think a "market correction" was due to MLB whether or not the general economy cratered. Industries can only be worth so much of the overall economic pie, and entertainment/sports are not a productive activity in the same sense that manufacturing or development are. Maybe dumping Rios for the money will look brilliant in three years?
As one who tends to the doomer side, I am not gleeful that the Jays are clearly cutting payroll at this point and seemingly forcing the offloading of more salary in the offseason. Only Yankee/RedSox/Rays/Orioles fans should be happy about this turn of events as a worse team in Canada means more wins for them and an easier division. But from the breakdowns many have gone through, the Jays can barely keep their 2009 payroll and field a team next year, even after Rios was dumped (note to TSN/Sportsnet - he wasn't traded please stop calling it that, he was waived and another team took him).
One further note on some of the analyses floating around on fangraphs/hardballtimes which assign salary value for wins above average, typically finding players like Rios are worth about what he was being paid. I don't think a lot of these actually apply anymore. In a contracting economy, players (and their associated win values) aren't worth as much, and I don't think the analyses are able to figure out the new values yet. Pro sports have expanded at massive rates, far exceeding inflation/GDP, for decades in terms of revenue and salaries. This cannot continue indefinitely, and I think a "market correction" was due to MLB whether or not the general economy cratered. Industries can only be worth so much of the overall economic pie, and entertainment/sports are not a productive activity in the same sense that manufacturing or development are. Maybe dumping Rios for the money will look brilliant in three years?
Jim, I was not referring to you, I was referring to a number of other posters who -- over the past year or two -- have advocated the "blow-it-up-and-rebuild" strategy as the best way to move forward. Now we'll see if their strategy works or not.
Jim, if you're completely confident that the Jays will finish in last place, every season, for the next five years, I don't really understand why you are even participating on Batters Box. In fact I've been puzzled by this from the beginning of your posts this year. Batter's Box is clearly a forum for people who wish the Jays well. Most of the analysis here is hard-edged and hard-nosed, which I appreciate, and it's not a cheerleading site for ordinary fans, which I also appreciate, but this is a site built by people who are fans of the Jays, who would like to see the Jays doing well. (Correct me if I'm wrong, Roster Members.) The arguments on Batters Box are among people who disagree on HOW the Jays should move forward -- what tactics and strategies will make the team successful. There is plenty of debate on those legitimate questions. But instead of debating those questions, you prefer to keep repeating that the Jays are a bad team, the Jays are terrible, the Jays have no hope. I think you're mistaking the debate here. We're not here simply to debate whether the Jays are good or bad. We're debating HOW the Jays can become good or bad. For you to be constantly telling us that the Jays are bad -- what's the point? What's your motivation? Why are you here?
Correction: you said 4th or 5th place (not necessarily last place) for the next five years. But all of my points remain valid. If you think the Jays have no hope of finishing above 4th place for the next five years, what kind of joy can you possibly hope to get from Batter's Box? Only, I suppose, the joy of saying "I'm right, you're wrong."
You can't blame Rogers for this predicament. They have invested far over the revenue generated by this team for multiple years and seen nothing in return. To ask them to spend 60 million dollars more every year (a more realistic amount for us to have competed with the Sox/Yanks) with no hope of getting it back is completely unreasonable. This problem is a direct result of MLB not acting on a ridiculous competitive imbalance. I would argue that it is probably people who are very knowledgeable about baseball making these decisions (the Wells contract being one last ditch effort at "spending for contending"). Now personally I didn't think that it was a good contract, but a case could have been made I guess.
If its true that they're selling the team, I believe that Rogers has just decided that this MLB thing is a gyp until they balance out the divisions (or I guess go to 8 playoff teams). It is ridiculous to have revenue sharing from the Sox/Yankees going to pay for the Florida Marlins payroll (a team that's playoff chances/revenue are in NO WAY affected by the Sox/Yanks). It is ridiculous to put the two highest spending teams in baseball in the same division, and then only allow a maximum of 2 teams from that division to make the playoffs. Rogers doesn't want out of the Blue Jays, they want out of the AL East, and rightly so! I guarentee you if the option of moving the Jays to the NL or AL Central came up they'd be all over it and our payroll would be directly tied to attendance which would be tied to success, which would be tied to decent management like it is everywhere else in baseball. Unfortunately decent management doesn't guarentee success in the AL East.
I have no problem with the decisions that have been made this year far by Rogers- all of these cost cutting measures have been good IMO. Personally I would have dealt some bullpen arms at the deadline, but the three decisions that have been made (dealing Rolen, letting Rios walk, and keeping Halladay) all seem like passable baseball decisions, and excellent financial decisions. I won't fault them for that. The only thing I fault Rogers for is not renovating the seating at the dome when they did the other renovations. I feel like I'm at a minor league stadium with that seating.
Nobody should blame Ricciardi for any of this -- it's obvious now that all of this is a Rogers corporate decision to slash payroll. All of the criticism of Ricciardi for the past 18 months was misdirected. He has been handcuffed by Rogers. No free agents, no big contracts, no gambles, nothing but typical Canadian corporate conservatism.
How can you not blame Riccardi? He's whiffed on so many giant contracts in his tenure that he's hamstrung the team. If I'm the owner of the team how can I continue to employ a guy in the past few months had to release BJ Ryan (while the owners get the priviledge to continue to pay him huge dollars) and then give away a player who has some value because he was signed to a ridiculous contract when his value was peaked.
Add in other dopey contracts like Frank Thomas and Vernon Wells and you've got a GM who continues to throw money away for a team that can't afford to do it. Riccardi has proven to be good at the 'small' moves (Scutaro, Downs, etc) but if you're completing with the Red Sox and Yankees you can't have 50% of your payroll tied up with guys who don't deliver nearly the value needed.
I strongly doubt that Rogers has seen nothing in return for owning the Jays. I strongly suspect that the Jays are a pretty big money maker for Rogers, when you take into account the amount of programming (and 'synergies') that they provide. Rogers just doesn't know what to do with the team.
I like to follow the Blue Jays? Sorry that I'm not blindly optimistic that this is now or is going to be in the future a good baseball team. I'd love for them to win, but unlike some here I've realized it has almost no chance of happening.
I've asked 15 different times how the Jays were going to compete in 2010 and never once was a realistic plan offered. It's always just... every decent prospect breaks out into stardom and every veteran has a career year. Or it's.. they only lose by 1 or 2 runs... so they are really better then their record and it's not 20 games they need to make up... by some crazy assumptions it's only 5.
The fact that they had to trade players to field a team in 2010 is obvious to every single person in baseball, yet it seemed to be beyond the grasp of some of the team's biggest fans. Hell, the smartest guy here spent the weekend telling us that the Rios claim wasn't a story and everyone in the media had it wrong.
People here will actually quote JP Riccardi and then try to rationalize their viewpoints by trying to parse what he is saying. The organization has been lying, is lying and will be lying to you going forward. Why anyone would defend the way they do business is ridiculous. You shouldn't want Riccardi fired because he's a bad baseball GM, that really doesn't matter there isn't anyone who can fix this thing in the short term anyway, you should want him fired because if you are a fan he treats you like a piece of #$*&. Granted his direction comes from above but he's the public face of selling you snakeoil.
Baltimore is headed in the right direction, Toronto is not, I'm sorry if pointing this out hurts anyone's delicate sensibilities, but if the last month hasn't show you that this is a rudderless adrift organization going nowhere then I don't know what you'd need to see.
Is there any reason why this needs to turn into a "Why are you even here?" moment? Surely there must be ways to discuss the matter without trying to draw for lines in the sand and say "My box!"
As far as I can see, Jim's calling it the way he sees it (though I don't agree with that vision all the time). So he's on the pessimistic side of the fence. It happens. It's perfectly understandable (though I'm more middle of the road). Just because his outlook offends you doesn't mean he's just picking a fight. Sourpusses can be fans, too. Just kidding, Jim.
Why does any of this even need to be said? I have talent-shedding brooding to do.
As far as I can see, Jim's calling it the way he sees it (though I don't agree with that vision all the time). So he's on the pessimistic side of the fence. It happens. It's perfectly understandable (though I'm more middle of the road). Just because his outlook offends you doesn't mean he's just picking a fight. Sourpusses can be fans, too. Just kidding, Jim.
Why does any of this even need to be said? I have talent-shedding brooding to do.
I'll take whatever bet you want to make. Without Halladay they wouldn't have won 74 games this year.
They're not there yet.
They're not there yet.
With Halladay I would give a better then even shot of beating 74 wins. Without Halladay they are more likely to lose 95 then win 74.
I'm pretty sure Halladay won't be around on April 1, 2010. What's the point? Once they went past July 31st, 2009 they decided to play with fire. I agreed with their decision because the offers stunk at the deadline, but if you don't move him in the offseason and he gets hurt next season before the deadline.......
Why would you go back to the deadline to do the same dance you did this year with fewer options then you have in the offseason?
Sorry Mick, I now understand what you meant :). Yeah, they might fall short of 74. Especially if they pull back on Cecil and the other young pitchers.
Well, I guess this means that JP is safe til the end of his contract. One thing alot of people gave him credit for was slashing payroll at the start and keeping the team competive. Now it looks like slash as much as possible without regard to how the team on the feild plays. Once that is done, maybe you will see a new GM to try and build back up.
Guess we need to get used to competing with KC for the bottom of the barrel in the AL.
How can you not blame Riccardi? He's whiffed on so many giant contracts in his tenure that he's hamstrung the team. If I'm the owner of the team how can I continue to employ a guy in the past few months had to release BJ Ryan (while the owners get the priviledge to continue to pay him huge dollars) and then give away a player who has some value because he was signed to a ridiculous contract when his value was peaked
The reasoning is that it wasn't JP who was linked to the Wells deal, but Godfrey. This Rios fiasco also seems to be Rogers' doing.
JP should be fired, but not because he did a bad job, he just didn't do a good enough one, and had some bad luck in terms of injuries to his pitchers dating all the way back to Prokepec and Carpenter.
Now it looks like slash as much as possible without regard to how the team on the feild plays.
Except it's clearly not, or else Halladay and Scutaro would already be gone.
Except it's clearly not, or else Halladay and Scutaro would already be gone.
Luke Prokopec. Haha. Good stuff to reference him...wow. A Jays-related smile from me, in a month that hasn't prompted many. Nice work.
If Halladay and Scutaro are both still with the Jays next season, under new or extended contracts, then of course we're not in a slash-and-burn era. But are you seriously predicting that this will happen? What evidence is there in the events of the past two months that would support the idea of Halladay and Scutaro still being with the Jays next season?
"Now it looks like slash as much as possible without regard to how the team on the feild plays."
Except it's clearly not, or else Halladay and Scutaro would already be gone.
Not to mention Downs and Frasor. I just hope this is the prelude to a firesale, and not setting the stage for $80M limbo. At least a decently run firesale will see a lot of talent coming back.
Not to mention Downs and Frasor. I just hope this is the prelude to a
firesale, and not setting the stage for $80M limbo. At least a decently
run firesale will see a lot of talent coming back.
I wouldn't get my hopes up. Didn't we learn anything from the deadline? Teams are much more protective of their prospects.
Unless the market rebounds in the off-season, the Jays will face the problem of either being sellers in a bad market or poor "buyers" in a market that won't be as soft as last year and is weak on talent at their positions of need. Either outcome is bad for fans. In the first scenario the Jays would be bad without many prospects to get excited about and in the other case they will be another "teaser contender".
The problem with Rogers being the owner is that there is a strong incentive for the Jays not to suck too badly which rules out the Tampa/Marlins route and at the same time not enough commitment to have a 100mil+ payroll for more than maybe one season. As depressing as it is, I'm very scared of a slow, painful demise with uncertain ending.
I wouldn't get my hopes up. Didn't we learn anything from the deadline? Teams are much more protective of their prospects.
Unless the market rebounds in the off-season, the Jays will face the problem of either being sellers in a bad market or poor "buyers" in a market that won't be as soft as last year and is weak on talent at their positions of need. Either outcome is bad for fans. In the first scenario the Jays would be bad without many prospects to get excited about and in the other case they will be another "teaser contender".
The problem with Rogers being the owner is that there is a strong incentive for the Jays not to suck too badly which rules out the Tampa/Marlins route and at the same time not enough commitment to have a 100mil+ payroll for more than maybe one season. As depressing as it is, I'm very scared of a slow, painful demise with uncertain ending.
Apparently I'm in the minority in thinking that this is NOT a salary dump. I think its a smart baseball/business man in Beeston finally reeling in Ricciardi and saying 'look stop hanging your hopes on guys like Rios, Wells, etc and lets retool with fresh faces next year'
I think Godfrey was more of an emotional "fan-type" president and Beeston (and hopefully his successor if there is one) is more of the pragmatic business type. I believe this team can compete in the AL East on an $80-mil payroll (+/- $5mil). JP has proven that a cheap, spare parts type bullpen approach anchored by a "proven" closer can be successful long-term and I firmly believe that the Jays would've played meaningful games in September of 2007 & 2008 if the offesnse had performed up to its payscale!
The problem as I see it, is that JP kept pinning his hopes on the offensive pieces he bought for 2007, 08, 09 etc instead of cutting bait and retooling.
It's only fitting that Back2Back weekend was here as today's Jays execs should learn from that era Jays' team! They didn't rest on their laurels and hope to win with the same cast of characters. The found and bought fresh ones, even if many thought "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".
That's why I'm of the mind in this offseason to be bold, shake things up! Offer Scutaro arbitration, if he accepts fine SS is solved. If he doesn't, take the 2 picks you would've never dreamed of getting for him 2 years ago!
If Rios was a free agent today (or this offseason) the Jays wouldn't consider signing him to a 5 year contract for $55-$60 million. So to be out from under that contract is a positive today, relative to yesterday. The mistake was the contract in the first place, although that was due more to the length of it than anything else (that'd be an interesting thread to read through now almost 2 years later).
Of course, putting that money to better use is not a strength of JP. And the possibility of sitting on the money isn't that great either (but I'm sure they'll spin the trade as allowing them to sign draft picks over the next week).
Bottom line - this is a team without a clear direction from ownership (roller coaster payroll) with a GM that isn't capable of spending money wisely when he has it. Which is pretty depressing.
Of course, putting that money to better use is not a strength of JP. And the possibility of sitting on the money isn't that great either (but I'm sure they'll spin the trade as allowing them to sign draft picks over the next week).
Bottom line - this is a team without a clear direction from ownership (roller coaster payroll) with a GM that isn't capable of spending money wisely when he has it. Which is pretty depressing.
What I wrote less than a month ago:
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.
(emphasis added)
The only thing that's changed is the above scenario has become more likely.
sorrry jgadfly, but if ANYONE deserves to be booed on the current roster it's Wells. He's having a horrible year at home. paying the ticket gives a fan the right to boo (within reason) if you're not satisfied with the entertainment. let's face it ,Wells has not been very entertaining this year (at home).
Booing someone just because they're having a bad year, or you don't like them, when they're having a good game is stupid. that's the time to just shut up. or better yet applaud (positive reinforcement of desired results). I don't think it helps either way, but i completely disagree with you on this issue.
but if people really really are steamed and think it will make a difference.. why don't you (all) write to Rogers corporate office and tell them you'll stop subscribing to all their services, and stop going to games while they dick around with the franchise. it won't have any effect.
Booing someone just because they're having a bad year, or you don't like them, when they're having a good game is stupid. that's the time to just shut up. or better yet applaud (positive reinforcement of desired results). I don't think it helps either way, but i completely disagree with you on this issue.
but if people really really are steamed and think it will make a difference.. why don't you (all) write to Rogers corporate office and tell them you'll stop subscribing to all their services, and stop going to games while they dick around with the franchise. it won't have any effect.
One further note on some of the analyses floating around on fangraphs/hardballtimes which assign salary value for wins above average, typically finding players like Rios are worth about what he was being paid. I don't think a lot of these actually apply anymore. In a contracting economy, players (and their associated win values) aren't worth as much, and I don't think the analyses are able to figure et
This is a good point, but for the Rios contract to be a " bad deal" the marketplace would have to contract about 40-50% or he would have to suffer some sort of catastrophic injury. I think the casual fan sees the constant tinkering with his batting stance, the occasional base running blunders and the seemingly frequent botched plays in the outfield and that's what sticks in their minds.
The overall picture ( and many fanboys make the fatal mistake of concentrating on only the most recent season instead of the larger sample size of several years) is that of a player who does many things well. He can play a premium defensive position-centre field. He has one of the most powerful arms in all of baseball. He can flat out run, steal bases and take the extra base on hits to the outfield. He has good range in the outfield ( see running ability) . He hits with some power. All this can be somewhat measured. All this has value. Moving forward he's basically 25-35 runs above what a guy like Buck Coates would bring to the table. Even if the marketplace fell 25 %, he's still within the parameters of what his contract calls for.
This is pure and simple a salary dump. Rogers is simply not willing to pay market value for post arbitration baseball talent.( thankfully Hill has a much palatable contract or he' d be gone too) In this division that's a hard formula to win by. What's even more distressing is that his contract really doesn't get inordinately expensive until 2012-Rogers apparrently is not willing to pay for value in the long term future either.
I'm not really sure how the meme developed where a team is a failure unless it's a surefire playoff club or a last-place team. Keeping Halladay in the face of subpar offers; trading Rolen for a good offer; and punting Rios' contract were each, individually, rational moves. I'd obviously prefer an immediate $50 million bump in payroll, but the thought that the team needs to create a foolproof 100-win or 100-loss club every season is simply wrong. The former is very difficult in this division, and the latter won't play in this market and over the Rogers airwaves.
So when I read something like Baltimore is headed in the right direction, Toronto is not, it's ridiculous for a variety of reasons.
Baltimore's win totals since 1997: 79, 78, 74, 63, 67, 71, 78, 74, 70, 69, 68 and heading for mid-60s this year. You cannot look at Baltimore's young players in a vacuum -- there is no way that you would trade the current state of the Jays, plus ten extra losses a year for the past twelve years, for the current state of the Orioles. How would attendance in Toronto look if you did?
Also, stop with the relocation talk because it's absurd on its face. There are no markets ready to take on an MLB franchise, and the far less valuable-in-its-market Expos took forever to complete its move. Anyway, the next team to be relocated will be the A's, and that won't happen soon, either. Pessimism Nation should stick to its "Arrieta is at least 50 times better than Romero" inanity.
You know what the real problem is with the Jays?
It's not ownership. Ownership is behaving conventionally.
It's not Ricciardi. Ricciardi has done a reasonable job.
It's not Gaston. He's done a reasonable job.
It's not the Yankees and Red Sox, although clearly they don't help.
It's not the Jays players, although clearly they've underperformed too often.
It's the population of Toronto, who has not supported this team.
Right now the Orioles are outdrawing the Jays at home (only by a little, but they are). The Orioles have an inferior team in a smaller, poorer city, and yet more people are going out to the ballpark to see them. Why? How?
Because Toronto fans are bad fans.
(I don't exclude myself: I haven't been to a game in way too long. Sure, I could give excuses: I've got young children who'd hate being at the ballpark, I've been unemployed, I've moved to Ottawa... The fact remains that I call myself a Jays fan but I can't even get to the game. I am a bad fan.)
A city the size of Toronto should never be in danger of losing a major sports franchise. If it happens, it's basically our fault.
But Matthew, they are not in danger. Jeff Blair gets grumpy and says he's reminded of the Expos and suddenly they're in danger? Who wants to move them? When has anyone at Rogers said they're selling? Why would they, when they can shuffle revenues and expenses and put Jays content across Canada over its TV and radio networks?
The Orioles are (narrowly) outdrawing the Jays fans at home for three reasons only:
1) Amtrak access for Yankees, Red Sox, Mets and Nationals fans. Seriously, look at the crowds for the Red Sox and Yankees in Baltimore.
2) The Jays' stingy attendance counting and elimination of freebies for 2009.
3) Camden Yards.
Your premise is so wrong it's offensive. And hey, whatever happened to the idea that Leafs fans were ruining the Leafs through packing the arena, even in lean years? Always Toronto fans' fault, it seems.
I would venture a guess that the Jays' attendance last year was the highest in baseball history for a team that had neither a playoff birth nor a new stadium over the preceding 15 years.
"I think Godfrey was more of an emotional "fan-type" president and Beeston (and hopefully his successor if there is one) is more of the pragmatic business type."
Interesting, because I think the exact opposite. I want to shoot myself when I listen to Beeston jabber with McCown like a bunch of school girls, completely avoiding any actual relevant issue that's important to Jays fans.
Interesting, because I think the exact opposite. I want to shoot myself when I listen to Beeston jabber with McCown like a bunch of school girls, completely avoiding any actual relevant issue that's important to Jays fans.
They are from Cot's and rounded off.
I hope you were doing so from memory and not looking.
Vernon is listed on Cott's at 12.5 (you said 16) and he has a bonus payment of 8.5 so he's actually going to get 21. And it couldn't have been the AAV cause that's 18.
There's nothing listed for Overbay that would make yu think 8 instead of 7, nor for Ryan that would make you think 12 instead of 10 (Ryan's not even on there anymore) - and EE makes closer to 5 than 4 (4.75)
Point is not to show you up, just wondering if you had a bad source.
If your contention delusion was based on the current players how could you not see that they couldn't bring those players back without taking salary through the roof and they were never doing that?
They could have kept the team reasonably together (Minus Bautista, Frasor, Tallet and Barajas) for about $95 million (as i have demonstrated here and elsewhere before). My "delusion" was based on the reasonable assumption they would allow payroll to grow that far.
I don't think it is any longer reasonable to make that assumption.
Not that it mattered anyway as bringing back the same players a year older wasn't going to make any difference.
You have to count in that "year older" analysis Snider, Lind, and the young pitchers too - they are still on the upward part of the curve - arguably Hill and Rios too. but then, this group of players is, like last year, considerably better than there W/L record would indicate so what it needed wasn't more talent but better outcomes in the places where luck and chance rule.
To be sure, they might have continued to be unlucky....but that's true of any group of players they might bring in here.
I hope you were doing so from memory and not looking.
Vernon is listed on Cott's at 12.5 (you said 16) and he has a bonus payment of 8.5 so he's actually going to get 21. And it couldn't have been the AAV cause that's 18.
There's nothing listed for Overbay that would make yu think 8 instead of 7, nor for Ryan that would make you think 12 instead of 10 (Ryan's not even on there anymore) - and EE makes closer to 5 than 4 (4.75)
Point is not to show you up, just wondering if you had a bad source.
If your contention delusion was based on the current players how could you not see that they couldn't bring those players back without taking salary through the roof and they were never doing that?
They could have kept the team reasonably together (Minus Bautista, Frasor, Tallet and Barajas) for about $95 million (as i have demonstrated here and elsewhere before). My "delusion" was based on the reasonable assumption they would allow payroll to grow that far.
I don't think it is any longer reasonable to make that assumption.
Not that it mattered anyway as bringing back the same players a year older wasn't going to make any difference.
You have to count in that "year older" analysis Snider, Lind, and the young pitchers too - they are still on the upward part of the curve - arguably Hill and Rios too. but then, this group of players is, like last year, considerably better than there W/L record would indicate so what it needed wasn't more talent but better outcomes in the places where luck and chance rule.
To be sure, they might have continued to be unlucky....but that's true of any group of players they might bring in here.
Mike..
it's not the fact that the team is a failure if it's not winning or losing a ton.. but it's the theory of the competitive cycle there's a bunch of parts to it.. but hanging around being mediocre for a bunch of years doesn't help a team towards winning a champsionship (theoretically the ultimate goal for the fans, while actually it's more likely being profitable for the owners.) so this is where rebuilding comes in.. there's also not much point in spending money on a free agent unless he's going ot put you over the top. (this is near the high point of the competitive cycle) same thing goes for paying an expensive closer when you're rebuilding.. there's not much point... better to try and create a closer and trade him for parts that will help you.
anyways.. it's not so much a question of success or failure, but more of a "if this isn't going to help win a championship... then we might as well lose and get a good draft pick" deal. rebuild the cheap talent base. sadly this year peopel were overvaluing prospects which meant makign good trades to speed pu the rebuilding process was difficult.
at a certain point being mediocre is ok.. especially if you have a young team (think 83/84 jays) because you should be able to expect them to get better. that's when you want to add pieces and go for it.
____________________competitive for championship (90+wins)_______________________
add free agents: young team on the way up(75-89 wins)___________________old/disfunctional team (75-89 wins) sell assets :
____________________rebuilding team (<75 wins)_________________________________
sorrry i'm not being the most coherent, but i'm trying to do too much at once.
someone feel free to recap and make clear.
i have no problems with rebuilding currently... because i didn't feel that the roster would win anything without a tremendous amount of luck. i'm just not a huge fan of how it's happening. id' rather be a fan of the pirates right now.
it's not the fact that the team is a failure if it's not winning or losing a ton.. but it's the theory of the competitive cycle there's a bunch of parts to it.. but hanging around being mediocre for a bunch of years doesn't help a team towards winning a champsionship (theoretically the ultimate goal for the fans, while actually it's more likely being profitable for the owners.) so this is where rebuilding comes in.. there's also not much point in spending money on a free agent unless he's going ot put you over the top. (this is near the high point of the competitive cycle) same thing goes for paying an expensive closer when you're rebuilding.. there's not much point... better to try and create a closer and trade him for parts that will help you.
anyways.. it's not so much a question of success or failure, but more of a "if this isn't going to help win a championship... then we might as well lose and get a good draft pick" deal. rebuild the cheap talent base. sadly this year peopel were overvaluing prospects which meant makign good trades to speed pu the rebuilding process was difficult.
at a certain point being mediocre is ok.. especially if you have a young team (think 83/84 jays) because you should be able to expect them to get better. that's when you want to add pieces and go for it.
____________________competitive for championship (90+wins)_______________________
add free agents: young team on the way up(75-89 wins)___________________old/disfunctional team (75-89 wins) sell assets :
____________________rebuilding team (<75 wins)_________________________________
sorrry i'm not being the most coherent, but i'm trying to do too much at once.
someone feel free to recap and make clear.
i have no problems with rebuilding currently... because i didn't feel that the roster would win anything without a tremendous amount of luck. i'm just not a huge fan of how it's happening. id' rather be a fan of the pirates right now.
Mike D,
I don't see how punting Rios' contract now is a rational move. He's worth more than his contract, and there is no reason to sell at a low point offensively. If the club decided that it did not want to keep both Wells and Rios for financial reasons, the logical thing would have been to move Rios to centerfield for the remainder of the season and entertain offers during the off-season. In other words, apply the same approach to the Rios situation that they applied to Halladay and Rolen.
I don't see how punting Rios' contract now is a rational move. He's worth more than his contract, and there is no reason to sell at a low point offensively. If the club decided that it did not want to keep both Wells and Rios for financial reasons, the logical thing would have been to move Rios to centerfield for the remainder of the season and entertain offers during the off-season. In other words, apply the same approach to the Rios situation that they applied to Halladay and Rolen.
put Jays content across Canada over its TV and radio networks?
As an aside that gets my ire, why the heck are there so many games on Sportsnet Ontario, and not on all the Sportsnet channels? As a Maritimer, If I'm going to be blacked out from watching the game on MLB.tv, I would at least like to have a reasonable option to watch it on TV. I shouldn't have to buy a timeshift pack, or get digital. Of course, then I drink a Dos Equis, and mlb.tv it is.
It's not only from a fan aspect that this gets me. I mean, what's the point of a synergy if you don't leverage it? Those Yankee and Red Sox games their showing in their place aren't cheap (or a regular season Montreal game instead of the home opener. That was fun)... certainly not as cheap as the Jays games, and plus, you're cross-promoting! It's not that hard of a concept! It's like sometimes they don't want the team to succeed.
Mike Green, I don't like selling low either. The situation leaves me cold.
But "worth more than his contract," through advanced metrics, doesn't especially matter when he would command less than his contract on the open market today. More to the point, were he a free agent and demanding 5/60, would you take it or let him walk? The Jays would let him walk, which is why the move was rational. I don't mean to say that this was the best use of Rios as an asset.
When it comes to figures I had the 2010 payroll (pre-Rolen/Rios getting out of town) at (including Barajas & Scutaro) around $100 million. Given past statements from the Jays (Beeston/JP) it seemed a reasonable assumption that they had $100 million available for 2010.
Now what? We have lost Rolen (wanted out of town for family reasons) and Rios (I keep wondering if there is an injury that we don't know of) and anyone claiming a Jay off waivers has to think that player is coming their way if the guy is signed for 2010 already (Overbay & Downs for example - Halladay would not be let go for nothing). Heck, if I was JP I'd sure be putting Downs on waivers quick as if he gets through you could potentially trade him if he comes back before month end and if he doesn't you could get rid of an injured player potentially (although the savings would not be much and should only be done if you think he won't come back in 2010 strong). Thus around $15 million saved (factoring in EE coming here).
So if the Jays keep payroll in the mid-80's they keep everyone they have now fairly easily. If they up it they can add. If they want to cut further then just let Barajas & Scutaro leave and there is about $5-7 million for 2010 saved (guessing what they'd get as free agents) and cut Bautista for another few million. Fiscally I can understand Rios being let go, although I keep thinking this could so easily look like a big mistake of the Doyle Alexander level (let go by Yankees then leads Jays to playoffs while being paid by Yankees - Rios not paid by Jays but could haunt) later.
Btw, original thread for contract is at http://www.battersbox.ca/article.php?story=20080404151759874&query=Alex%2BRios%2Bcontract
Now what? We have lost Rolen (wanted out of town for family reasons) and Rios (I keep wondering if there is an injury that we don't know of) and anyone claiming a Jay off waivers has to think that player is coming their way if the guy is signed for 2010 already (Overbay & Downs for example - Halladay would not be let go for nothing). Heck, if I was JP I'd sure be putting Downs on waivers quick as if he gets through you could potentially trade him if he comes back before month end and if he doesn't you could get rid of an injured player potentially (although the savings would not be much and should only be done if you think he won't come back in 2010 strong). Thus around $15 million saved (factoring in EE coming here).
So if the Jays keep payroll in the mid-80's they keep everyone they have now fairly easily. If they up it they can add. If they want to cut further then just let Barajas & Scutaro leave and there is about $5-7 million for 2010 saved (guessing what they'd get as free agents) and cut Bautista for another few million. Fiscally I can understand Rios being let go, although I keep thinking this could so easily look like a big mistake of the Doyle Alexander level (let go by Yankees then leads Jays to playoffs while being paid by Yankees - Rios not paid by Jays but could haunt) later.
Btw, original thread for contract is at http://www.battersbox.ca/article.php?story=20080404151759874&query=Alex%2BRios%2Bcontract
Oh, for those who don't click on the link to the old story when the contract was signed - it was pretty much universal that it was a great deal. Be thankful that was wrong about Dustin McGowan being next.
Some of the comments sure look silly today though....
Some of the comments sure look silly today though....
- I would not mention Pedroia with the likes of Utley, Phillips, Roberts and Cano. (Pedroia predicted to go down, all listed as better than Hill)
- I think these deals cement JP Ricciardi as a top 5 GM, in my opinion.
- I said: "Now the Jays need a solid prospect for 3B & SS to finish off the offense from now until 2014." Frustrating that this is still the case.
- CJF might have called it with "However, I think that Janssen is done as a pitcher. With a torn labrum, he will probably be lucky to ever pitch successfully as a major leaguer again." as did Timbuck "You might as well forget about Chacin too since he's recovering from a torn labrum too."
- Last word to Wildrose... "To give you an idea what kind of coin were talking about, using Tango's $ 4.4 per marginal win and adjusting for inflation, and given that Rios preforms at a reasonable level, he'd command as a free agent after 2010 about $ 16-19 million per year on the open market. He's signed for about $10.8 during this time period, a significant amount of surplus value garnered for the team."
4.75 MM for "potential" is a little expensive, but I think Encarnacion is going to be just fine.
Thing that worries me is how much of that offensive potential is a result of the band-box he used to play in?
I'm looking for him to be a .780-.800 guy...if he wants to prove me wrong beyond that I'll be happy to see it.
It wasn't that the Jays COULDN'T sign their drafted players. It was that with the Rios money on the books, there was concern that they WOULDN'T.
There is no evidence in the recent history of the team that would lead to that worry - if the Jays failed to sign a top draft pick it would be an utterly shocking reversal of there longstanding pattern of behavior.
but I'm still hoping he gets fired in the offseason. It's bad form for anyone in his position to get to do a tear down and rebuild twice, without any p(l)ayoff in between. As a corporation, you would think Rogers would know this.
I tend to agree with your reasoning (I think JP does too because he aludded to a similar thought the last time Wilner interviewed him) BUT I, for one, would prefer to see him resign than be fired. Especially if it can be aranged to have an orderly transition of power to LaCava or Anthopoulus
Only, I suppose, the joy of saying "I'm right, you're wrong."
Did you read the archived thread about the wisdom of the Wells deal? All of us have to eat our previous words at some point.
Anyone who gets too caught up in "being right" will come off foolish in the end.
You can't blame Rogers for this predicament. They have invested far over the revenue generated by this team for multiple years and seen nothing in return.
Easier to do when you can cook the books to minimize the revenue streams of the team in order to make the other operations look even more profitable.
It's not like the Jays can sell ad rights and so forth on a free market.
To ask them to spend 60 million dollars more every year (a more realistic amount for us to have competed with the Sox/Yanks) with no hope of getting it back is completely unreasonable
There's every hope - if the Jays were in a pennet race virtually every year, the revenue streams would flood as they did before. You have to spend money to make money.
I believe that Rogers has just decided that this MLB thing is a gyp until they balance out the divisions
They're right and that might be there thinking but if it is they are right to bail because as Wilner points out, MLB has no incentive to do anything but make life easy for the most popular teams - the ones who get ratings on television and drive big TV contracts.
and then give away a player who has some value because he was signed to a ridiculous contract when his value was peaked.
A good case can be made against the Ryan deal but the Rios deal was a perfectly legitimate signing. there was NO ONE who got paid to watch players play baseball who thought rios was CLOSE to his ceiling when that deal was signed. He was signed for what would have been EXCELLENT value if he had blossomed into the production EVERY SCOUT and professional projected for him. and if he does grow into that sort of player in Chicago (and he well might) then Williams will look like a genius.
bitch about Wells or Ryan all you want, but the Rios contract wasn't a bad move at all.
"To give you an idea what kind of coin were talking about, using Tango's $ 4.4 per marginal win and adjusting for inflation, and given that Rios preforms at a reasonable level, he'd command as a free agent after 2010 about $ 16-19 million per year on the open market. He's signed for about $10.8 during this time period, a significant amount of surplus value garnered for the team."
Given the state of the pre-recession market, that was completely true, and depending on how it (and Rios) rebounds, has a pretty good shot at still being true.
Thing that worries me is how much of that offensive potential is a result of the band-box he used to play in?
I'm looking for him to be a .780-.800 guy...if he wants to prove me wrong beyond that I'll be happy to see it.
It wasn't that the Jays COULDN'T sign their drafted players. It was that with the Rios money on the books, there was concern that they WOULDN'T.
There is no evidence in the recent history of the team that would lead to that worry - if the Jays failed to sign a top draft pick it would be an utterly shocking reversal of there longstanding pattern of behavior.
but I'm still hoping he gets fired in the offseason. It's bad form for anyone in his position to get to do a tear down and rebuild twice, without any p(l)ayoff in between. As a corporation, you would think Rogers would know this.
I tend to agree with your reasoning (I think JP does too because he aludded to a similar thought the last time Wilner interviewed him) BUT I, for one, would prefer to see him resign than be fired. Especially if it can be aranged to have an orderly transition of power to LaCava or Anthopoulus
Only, I suppose, the joy of saying "I'm right, you're wrong."
Did you read the archived thread about the wisdom of the Wells deal? All of us have to eat our previous words at some point.
Anyone who gets too caught up in "being right" will come off foolish in the end.
You can't blame Rogers for this predicament. They have invested far over the revenue generated by this team for multiple years and seen nothing in return.
Easier to do when you can cook the books to minimize the revenue streams of the team in order to make the other operations look even more profitable.
It's not like the Jays can sell ad rights and so forth on a free market.
To ask them to spend 60 million dollars more every year (a more realistic amount for us to have competed with the Sox/Yanks) with no hope of getting it back is completely unreasonable
There's every hope - if the Jays were in a pennet race virtually every year, the revenue streams would flood as they did before. You have to spend money to make money.
I believe that Rogers has just decided that this MLB thing is a gyp until they balance out the divisions
They're right and that might be there thinking but if it is they are right to bail because as Wilner points out, MLB has no incentive to do anything but make life easy for the most popular teams - the ones who get ratings on television and drive big TV contracts.
and then give away a player who has some value because he was signed to a ridiculous contract when his value was peaked.
A good case can be made against the Ryan deal but the Rios deal was a perfectly legitimate signing. there was NO ONE who got paid to watch players play baseball who thought rios was CLOSE to his ceiling when that deal was signed. He was signed for what would have been EXCELLENT value if he had blossomed into the production EVERY SCOUT and professional projected for him. and if he does grow into that sort of player in Chicago (and he well might) then Williams will look like a genius.
bitch about Wells or Ryan all you want, but the Rios contract wasn't a bad move at all.
"To give you an idea what kind of coin were talking about, using Tango's $ 4.4 per marginal win and adjusting for inflation, and given that Rios preforms at a reasonable level, he'd command as a free agent after 2010 about $ 16-19 million per year on the open market. He's signed for about $10.8 during this time period, a significant amount of surplus value garnered for the team."
Given the state of the pre-recession market, that was completely true, and depending on how it (and Rios) rebounds, has a pretty good shot at still being true.
Thing that worries me is how much of that offensive potential is a result of the band-box he used to play in?
I think you're selling Encarnacion a little short. From ages 23 to 25 he posted OPS+'s of 108, 101, 106. His age-26 season is not going so well, and one would think his injury has much to do with that.
It can certainly be argued that when his defense is factored in, he won't be worth the $4.75M he's due, but this a guy who in 2010 will be entering age-27 season with some degree of offensive success behind him at the major league level. There would seem to be at least a little room for optimism.
I find it odd that people are so bullish on Brian Dopirak, a 25-year old with 100 AAA ABs, and so pessimistic about Encarnacion, a 26-year old with 1800 MLB ABs and a career OPS+ of 101.
I think you're selling Encarnacion a little short. From ages 23 to 25 he posted OPS+'s of 108, 101, 106. His age-26 season is not going so well, and one would think his injury has much to do with that.
It can certainly be argued that when his defense is factored in, he won't be worth the $4.75M he's due, but this a guy who in 2010 will be entering age-27 season with some degree of offensive success behind him at the major league level. There would seem to be at least a little room for optimism.
I find it odd that people are so bullish on Brian Dopirak, a 25-year old with 100 AAA ABs, and so pessimistic about Encarnacion, a 26-year old with 1800 MLB ABs and a career OPS+ of 101.
Point is not to show you up, just wondering if you had a bad source.
I'll look again, but it seems the issue is that Cot's contains prorated signing bonuses, which I agree isn't the best number to use (I didn't realize they contained that). For example I'm pretty sure it has 7.95 for Overbay for 2010. My rounded numbers from the somewhat incorrect source for our purposes were 2.5 MM different anyway in total, so it isn't like it changes the premise or conclusion.
They could have kept the team reasonably together (Minus Bautista, Frasor, Tallet and Barajas) for about $95 million (as i have demonstrated here and elsewhere before). My "delusion" was based on the reasonable assumption they would allow payroll to grow that far.
That team isn't anywhere near good enough to win, so why would they increase payroll by 19% to win fewer games with the same roster? You may as well have assumed that they are going to 'spend as much as Boston' because it had the same chances of happening.
Btw, original thread for contract is at http://www.battersbox.ca/article.php?story=20080404151759874&query=Alex%2BRios%2Bcontract
Oh, for those who don't click on the link to the old story when the contract was signed - it was pretty much universal that it was a great deal.
I suggest going back a little further, to before the Jays extended Rios. http://www.battersbox.ca/article.php?story=2008020511512877
My thoughts then : "Stay year to year to Rios, and reassess in 2010. If Lind and Snider's bats demand spots in the OF next to your "franchise" CF, the Jays are probably best off trading Rios or waiting for the 2 compensatory picks."
CaramonLS had his head screwed on straight back then too : "There is no point in paying someone a CF premium to not play CF for this jays team. Not to mention another right handed bat. I'll be quite happy when Rios is not a Jay anymore. This is not to say that Rios isn't a solid player... because he is, just a square peg trying to fit in a round hole on this team. Hopefully the Left handed power of Adam Lind/Travis Snider are ready to rock, so this discussion will be over."
Oh, for those who don't click on the link to the old story when the contract was signed - it was pretty much universal that it was a great deal.
I suggest going back a little further, to before the Jays extended Rios. http://www.battersbox.ca/article.php?story=2008020511512877
My thoughts then : "Stay year to year to Rios, and reassess in 2010. If Lind and Snider's bats demand spots in the OF next to your "franchise" CF, the Jays are probably best off trading Rios or waiting for the 2 compensatory picks."
CaramonLS had his head screwed on straight back then too : "There is no point in paying someone a CF premium to not play CF for this jays team. Not to mention another right handed bat. I'll be quite happy when Rios is not a Jay anymore. This is not to say that Rios isn't a solid player... because he is, just a square peg trying to fit in a round hole on this team. Hopefully the Left handed power of Adam Lind/Travis Snider are ready to rock, so this discussion will be over."
You have to count in that "year older" analysis Snider, Lind, and the young pitchers too - they are still on the upward part of the curve - arguably Hill and Rios too. but then, this group of players is, like last year, considerably better than there W/L record would indicate so what it needed wasn't more talent but better outcomes in the places where luck and chance rule.
How many years in a row does their record need to be worse then what you think the talent should afford before you realize that you overrate the talent?
This team went from 27-14 to out of contention by the middle of July. You want to chalk that up to luck and chance? They are going to finish ~25 games back. Do you really believe that with better 'luck' and 'chance' they can make up a 25 game deficit by standing still while the other four teams in the division improve?
As far as aging another year, Hill and Lind are probably having career years. Even assuming that they will match this year next year is an aggressive assumption, if you expect them to be better you are going to be disappointed. Sure, Snider, Cecil, Wells and Rios could be better next year. Romero, Rolen, Scutaro, Hill, Lind and Halladay could have given back that gain plus some.
This team got legitimately great years from Halladay, Rolen, Hill, Scutaro, Lind and Romero and they can't see the playoffs with a telescope and a map of the stars, even after they started 27-14. There was never anyway in the world that bringing back the same roster was a good idea.
I also understand that Baltimore stunk for a long time. However the talent they have put together didn't take them 10 years to accumulate. They have drafted and traded for all those players in the last 3 years. They did the Toronto thing where they had no plan and finally they made a change and found someone who put one in place. They got a huge headstart from the Bedard trade. Riccardi isn't going to get half of that from Halladay and that's the sad part.
Regardless of how long it took Baltimore to improve, they still are at the point where their win totals are going to be rising. Since Toronto plays them 19 times a year, that's just makes the schedule tougher and makes the hole to dig out of deeper.
Heh. That is a tendency at times, to overproject minor leaguers and forget the actual age of major leaguers. Still, I remember years ago (don't have it linked anymore so cannot show it) I put together a spreadsheet with data from all major leaguers which showed that, regardless of position or anything else (including what era they played in) guys would produce within 100 OPS points of their career average for all but 1 or 2 seasons as a rule (there were obviously many exceptions but generally that is what one should assume) and that the peak season(s) would be about 200 OPS points off their norm as would their basement seasons. Peak seasons were as likely to happen (or more iirc) at 25 as they were at 30 but extremely rare for post age 32 although pre age 25 was actually a lot more common than one would expect.
So lets look at Rios' OPS: 720-703-865-852-798-744 overall 786 - all seasons within 100 points of his average but if he stays at the 700-740 range from now on his two 850 years will be clear peaks at 25 and 26. He could have a 900 season or two in him (to expect more than 2 of those is far too optimistic), but he also could have a 650 or two as well.
Would I have dumped him for nothing now? My first thought is 'no' but we also don't know how general revenues for MLB are (the universally shared stuff like national TV revenue, merchandise, internet, international TV rights) and those have a big impact on the bottom line for all MLB teams (iirc it is over $50 million a year per team now). If that took a major hit then cutting budgets around the majors by $10+ million could be common.
So lets look at Rios' OPS: 720-703-865-852-798-744 overall 786 - all seasons within 100 points of his average but if he stays at the 700-740 range from now on his two 850 years will be clear peaks at 25 and 26. He could have a 900 season or two in him (to expect more than 2 of those is far too optimistic), but he also could have a 650 or two as well.
Would I have dumped him for nothing now? My first thought is 'no' but we also don't know how general revenues for MLB are (the universally shared stuff like national TV revenue, merchandise, internet, international TV rights) and those have a big impact on the bottom line for all MLB teams (iirc it is over $50 million a year per team now). If that took a major hit then cutting budgets around the majors by $10+ million could be common.
Mike D,
Let's assume that salaries will be flat, rather than increasing. I'd pay Rios 5/60 on the open market if I needed a centerfielder, without use of advanced metrics. He's hit .285/.335/.451 for his career through age 28. I'd guess that he will roughly continue to do that. He plays a good centerfield, from observation, and has a fine arm. He runs well and is an efficient basestealing threat. He makes any number of baserunning and fielding gaffes over a season. He has been quite durable despite his thin physique. It's easily a $12 million package.
He provides more value than A.J. Burnett, for instance.
Let's assume that salaries will be flat, rather than increasing. I'd pay Rios 5/60 on the open market if I needed a centerfielder, without use of advanced metrics. He's hit .285/.335/.451 for his career through age 28. I'd guess that he will roughly continue to do that. He plays a good centerfield, from observation, and has a fine arm. He runs well and is an efficient basestealing threat. He makes any number of baserunning and fielding gaffes over a season. He has been quite durable despite his thin physique. It's easily a $12 million package.
He provides more value than A.J. Burnett, for instance.
How many years in a row does their record need to be worse then what you think the talent should afford before you realize that you overrate the talent?
I think that was a reference to their near-constant underperforming vs their Pythagorean record.
Jim, I'm no Pythag hardliner, but the team's Pythag record was 93-69 last year and is 60-51 this year, Road Trips from Hell and all. They are underachieving their run differential and that's just a fact. Sneer if you must at "luck and chance," but the argument you're mocking at least has a basis.
I'm not really sure how you can say it's "probable" that Lind is having a career year when he's four months older than Markakis (who, incidentally, was the #7 overall pick in 2003, not 'within the last 3 years'). It's an example of your undifferentiated pessimism, which is why I'm delighted you took my bet.
How many years in a row does their record need to be worse then what
you think the talent should afford before you realize that you overrate
the talent?
A good point. One thing I still can't figure out though: currently the Jays are +43 in RF/RA.
They are BY FAR the worst team in MLB with a positive RF/RA (except for Minn who has the same record, but is +9).
Seattle is -41 but is 4-5 games better. Houston is -91 and better than the Jays. St. Louis is +42 and is 7 games ahead of the Jays.
EVERY OTHER FREAKIN' TEAM IN MLB with a +ve RF/RA (except Minn at +9) has a better than .500 record, EXCEPT for the Jays.
We've given up 2 more runs than Seattle, and they've scored 86 runs LESS, and still have a better record? Their offense has scored almost a run per game less with the same pitching, and yet they have a better record.
I'm not a stathead, so I don't know what to make of this. My wild guesses are:
1) the Jays are extremely unlucky
2) Seattle is extremely lucky
3) both
4) Seattle has no real 5th starter, so they do well 1-4, and get CREAMED every 5th game by scores of 10-1, whereas the Jays lose every game by 1 or 2 runs?
5) Nope, I guess 4 is wrong - Jays are 14-20 in 1-run games, and Seattle is an unbelievable 27-14!! Luck? Skill?
Apparently, it's possible to lose almost 100 runs off our offense (which Rios + Rolen has maybe done) and still have a +500 record (as Seattle is doing right now). So, maybe we won't be in such bad shape next year, if the pitching staff remains more or less intact?
Sorry for the rambling, just had to vent somewhere..
A good point. One thing I still can't figure out though: currently the Jays are +43 in RF/RA.
They are BY FAR the worst team in MLB with a positive RF/RA (except for Minn who has the same record, but is +9).
Seattle is -41 but is 4-5 games better. Houston is -91 and better than the Jays. St. Louis is +42 and is 7 games ahead of the Jays.
EVERY OTHER FREAKIN' TEAM IN MLB with a +ve RF/RA (except Minn at +9) has a better than .500 record, EXCEPT for the Jays.
We've given up 2 more runs than Seattle, and they've scored 86 runs LESS, and still have a better record? Their offense has scored almost a run per game less with the same pitching, and yet they have a better record.
I'm not a stathead, so I don't know what to make of this. My wild guesses are:
1) the Jays are extremely unlucky
2) Seattle is extremely lucky
3) both
4) Seattle has no real 5th starter, so they do well 1-4, and get CREAMED every 5th game by scores of 10-1, whereas the Jays lose every game by 1 or 2 runs?
5) Nope, I guess 4 is wrong - Jays are 14-20 in 1-run games, and Seattle is an unbelievable 27-14!! Luck? Skill?
Apparently, it's possible to lose almost 100 runs off our offense (which Rios + Rolen has maybe done) and still have a +500 record (as Seattle is doing right now). So, maybe we won't be in such bad shape next year, if the pitching staff remains more or less intact?
Sorry for the rambling, just had to vent somewhere..
I'd pay Rios 5/60 on the open market
Perhaps you would, but I don't think you'd have to as a GM. Gammons estimated that Rios would make somewhere between 3/24 and 3/30 on the open market this year at most. Olney had a similar estimate (2/20-3/30, "maybe").
That assumes declining salaries, Mike D. That might be what happens. We won't really know. The only real centerfielder who is available this off-season would be Mike Cameron.
It really comes down to extreme "point-in-time"-ism. Rios is not doing well at this point in time. The free agent market is down at this point in time. Therefore, dump a 5 year contract. If a club is going to enter into these things with the possible good outcomes (Longoria, Pujols, Aaron Hill...) and the bad (Vernon Wells, Eric Hinske...), it really behooves the club to take an approach balanced between short and long term.
It really comes down to extreme "point-in-time"-ism. Rios is not doing well at this point in time. The free agent market is down at this point in time. Therefore, dump a 5 year contract. If a club is going to enter into these things with the possible good outcomes (Longoria, Pujols, Aaron Hill...) and the bad (Vernon Wells, Eric Hinske...), it really behooves the club to take an approach balanced between short and long term.
I agree with that for sure, Mike G. I might further point out that there is an awful lot of extreme "point-in-time"-ism in this discussion.
Seattle doesn't play in the AL East. That's how I explain it. It is also how I explain the Pythag record over the last couple years...doesn't matter how many times we beat up on the rest of the league, we keep getting nipped by the big 3 in the AL East, because, admittedly, they are better teams.
Randy Ruiz gets the call up according to jordan bastian on twitter. Good to see him finally get a shot, especially with the monsterous season he's been putting up in LV.
"Virtually every single move being made by the U.S. government in the past year has been the sort of moves a wise man would make if he were TRYING to make things worse."
That's a strong statement and needs to be backed up by evidence. As far as I can tell (and all I do is read the Economist regularly) is that Obama is following pretty much tried and true Keynesian economics. There's no hit of him or the democrats in the house/senate making things worse.
Your statement however applies in spades to the fiasco of last fall, everything from letting Lehman fall, the marriage of Lynch and Bank of America and the TARP money being handed out as bonuses to bankers.
Most economic indicators (save, importantly employment but that's known to be a laggy indicator because of inherent structural slowness in hiring, but not firing) shown that things are turning around. It is difficult to put together a cogent argument that things are getting worse. Sure there are things that need to be done before everything is fixed (one big one is the US's relationship with China, a country much of the blame of the mess can be laid because of its absurd saving/investment - consumer spending ratio).
At any rate, this doesn't belong in a baseball forum, but yes, things are turning around. The Canadian economy has become relatively less coupled with the US over the last 15 years (aside from the notable exception of the auto and forest industries). This isn't kool-aid, but merely what the economic indicators are showing.
That's a strong statement and needs to be backed up by evidence. As far as I can tell (and all I do is read the Economist regularly) is that Obama is following pretty much tried and true Keynesian economics. There's no hit of him or the democrats in the house/senate making things worse.
Your statement however applies in spades to the fiasco of last fall, everything from letting Lehman fall, the marriage of Lynch and Bank of America and the TARP money being handed out as bonuses to bankers.
Most economic indicators (save, importantly employment but that's known to be a laggy indicator because of inherent structural slowness in hiring, but not firing) shown that things are turning around. It is difficult to put together a cogent argument that things are getting worse. Sure there are things that need to be done before everything is fixed (one big one is the US's relationship with China, a country much of the blame of the mess can be laid because of its absurd saving/investment - consumer spending ratio).
At any rate, this doesn't belong in a baseball forum, but yes, things are turning around. The Canadian economy has become relatively less coupled with the US over the last 15 years (aside from the notable exception of the auto and forest industries). This isn't kool-aid, but merely what the economic indicators are showing.
I think that was a reference to their near-constant underperforming vs their Pythagorean record.
I know and understand the argument. Maybe the Jays don't need realignment, they need to play for a run differential playoff. It's 270 games over the past two seasons. It's really just luck that they are so far behind their pythag record?
They are 14-20 in 1 run games, not great, but not absurdly bad.
Maybe they are bad in 1 run games because their manager sits on his hands and has a bench that's about a useful as a poopy flavored lollipop.
They piled up some huge blowouts early in the year when their record was good. The problem is when you pile all those runs into a short part of the season you can only win those games once. By April 24th they were already plus 50 on the run differential. They were 13-5 at that point. They had another 6 game stretch in May where they were +20 but were only 4-2.
They piled up that run differential in a small period during the year and their record reflected what you would expect over that stretch.
I'm sure the argument is that if they can blow those teams out that reflects that they are of a high quality, but it could just be they poured on runs in a handful of games and the record is more accurate then the runs scored and allowed.
I find it odd that people are so bullish on Brian Dopirak, a 25-year
old with 100 AAA ABs, and so pessimistic about Encarnacion, a 26-year
old with 1800 MLB ABs and a career OPS+ of 101.
That is kinda funny huh? It bothers me bit that Sickels wasn't as impressed by BD last weekend as I'd have liked. There's always a bit of bias towards producing guys out of your own system i guess.
Still, I DON'T think EE is a bum offensively - i think around .800 would be just fine as a full time guy at that rate of pay. If he CAN be brought up to something around league average defensively that would be valuable, especially given the dirth of quality options out there as an alternative.
I could definately warm up to him under the right circumstances.
***
I'll look again, but it seems the issue is that Cot's contains prorated signing bonuses, which I agree isn't the best number to use (I didn't realize they contained that).
Go directly to the team page:
http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2005/01/toronto-blue-jays_05.html
so it isn't like it changes the premise or conclusion.
Not at all, in this instance, especially given that the actual figure was HIGHER.- but I have a sort of philanthropic interest in seeing folks use the best info out there. Once a false thing gets repeated a few times ("five year plan") it becomes a common myth because someone read it on the internet. nothing grates on me more than to debate someone who is convinced of the truth of a false thing and uses that "fact" as the basis of his argument.
Anytime I can help a reasonable sort like yourself get good info it minimizes those inadvertent "facts" gaining currency.
That team isn't anywhere near good enough to win, so why would they increase payroll by 19% to win fewer games with the same roster?
Since I disagree with the premise, the question is meaningless to me.
How many years in a row does their record need to be worse then what you think the talent should afford before you realize that you overrate the talent?
Well, this would be all of TWO so I think I'm within the safety margin. In 2006 they were right where I thought they should be, in 2007 they were hit with key injuries and you write a year like that off. last year they were a 92-93 win team that under-preform in the win column pretty dramatically and all the higher level statistical analysis agrees with that conclusion.
this year they were, in my view, about a .530ish team on paper, albeit it's turned out some things went better than I expected and other things went worse. And according to BP's 3rd order winning precentage, they actually are a bit better than that. They have about 6 fewer wins than they "should" have. There are only 6 teams in the majors with a better figure, sadly three of them are in the AL East.
and that with a team with one veteran starter, a black hole offensively at C and LF/DH (depending on where Lind is) and tremendous under-achievement from their two highest expectation hitters.
Do you really believe that with better 'luck' and 'chance' they can make up a 25 game deficit by standing still while the other four teams in the division improve?
Do I think they WILL? That's not the signals I'm getting lately. Do I think that if they had kept the team largely intact they could have? Absolutely (albeit, they wouldn't have finished 25 games back of a playoff spot with the team intact)
You speak as if it's impossible. In 2007 the Rays finished in 5th place, 30 games out. In 2008 they 31 wins and had seven more wins than they would have needed to win the Wild Card. So that's an actual swing to make the playoffs of 24.
I assume you would reply that the Rays made a lot of changes between those two years, but it's not true.
Longoria was added, true, but in my prognosis, I allow for a similar contribution from Snider as being a big element;
Garza stepped into the rotation, but he pitched about as well as Marcum typically pitches - other than those two, it was largely the same crew. On top of that, Pena, Crawford, and Upton all played noteably WORSE in 2008 than they had in 2007 so your assumption that players like Rolen and Hill would regress, even if it proved out, wouldn't prove that they couldn't do what the Rays did.
On the other hand, several relief pitchers pitched much better.
The point is, the VAST majority of the team that went from 66 wins to 97 in one year were the exact same guys.
So yeah, it's not all that unrealistic at all to have suggested that the team we had on July 30 could have finished with 75 or so wins and had made the playoffs with most of the same guys in 2010. Not at all.
and just so you know I'm not being a homer, I'd say the same thing about Baltimore. I don't THINK they will gel just yet, I'm thinking a slower ascent than the Rays demonstrated. But I wouldn't for a second think it was impossible that that young outfield, and Weiters and Roberts could team up with the improved starting staff and make a little magic. (other than the simple existance of the Red Sox and Yankees but the Rays had that to overcome too)
As far as aging another year, Hill and Lind are probably having career years. Even assuming that they will match this year next year is an aggressive assumption, if you expect them to be better you are going to be disappointed.
I doubt seriously this is Lind peak. I DO think Hill will likely never approach 40 homers again, but those will go back to being doubles and i think he might have a better OPS/OPS+ in future years than he does now.
Frankly, it's comments like that that show one to be over-compensating instead of just being unbiased. If Lind were playing for the Orioles or the Rays would you take it as a given he will never be as good again as he is at 25?
what do you think of Jabcoby Elsbury? Dustin Pedroia? Dioner Navarro? Matt Garza? Nick Markakis? Hanley Ramirez? Ryan Braun? Prince Fielder? Ryan Zimmerman? Troy Tulowitski? Adam Jones? Brian McCann? Mark Reynolds? Kendry Morales? David Wright? Zach Grienke? Josh Johnson?
Does everyone peak by 26 or just when they put on a Jays uniform?
By the way, if you argue that Can't expect Lind to get better, how can you then argue the O's are on an upward curve when so much of that potential success depends on Markakis and Jones? Why should they get better but Lind won't? Why expect more from Weiters than fron Snider?Why find 31 year old Roberts more dependable than 27 year old Hill?
***
doesn't matter how many times we beat up on the rest of the league, we keep getting nipped by the big 3 in the AL East, because, admittedly, they are better teams.
This is the first year since 2004 that the Jays have played badly against the beasts of the East.
That is kinda funny huh? It bothers me bit that Sickels wasn't as impressed by BD last weekend as I'd have liked. There's always a bit of bias towards producing guys out of your own system i guess.
Still, I DON'T think EE is a bum offensively - i think around .800 would be just fine as a full time guy at that rate of pay. If he CAN be brought up to something around league average defensively that would be valuable, especially given the dirth of quality options out there as an alternative.
I could definately warm up to him under the right circumstances.
***
I'll look again, but it seems the issue is that Cot's contains prorated signing bonuses, which I agree isn't the best number to use (I didn't realize they contained that).
Go directly to the team page:
http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2005/01/toronto-blue-jays_05.html
so it isn't like it changes the premise or conclusion.
Not at all, in this instance, especially given that the actual figure was HIGHER.- but I have a sort of philanthropic interest in seeing folks use the best info out there. Once a false thing gets repeated a few times ("five year plan") it becomes a common myth because someone read it on the internet. nothing grates on me more than to debate someone who is convinced of the truth of a false thing and uses that "fact" as the basis of his argument.
Anytime I can help a reasonable sort like yourself get good info it minimizes those inadvertent "facts" gaining currency.
That team isn't anywhere near good enough to win, so why would they increase payroll by 19% to win fewer games with the same roster?
Since I disagree with the premise, the question is meaningless to me.
How many years in a row does their record need to be worse then what you think the talent should afford before you realize that you overrate the talent?
Well, this would be all of TWO so I think I'm within the safety margin. In 2006 they were right where I thought they should be, in 2007 they were hit with key injuries and you write a year like that off. last year they were a 92-93 win team that under-preform in the win column pretty dramatically and all the higher level statistical analysis agrees with that conclusion.
this year they were, in my view, about a .530ish team on paper, albeit it's turned out some things went better than I expected and other things went worse. And according to BP's 3rd order winning precentage, they actually are a bit better than that. They have about 6 fewer wins than they "should" have. There are only 6 teams in the majors with a better figure, sadly three of them are in the AL East.
and that with a team with one veteran starter, a black hole offensively at C and LF/DH (depending on where Lind is) and tremendous under-achievement from their two highest expectation hitters.
Do you really believe that with better 'luck' and 'chance' they can make up a 25 game deficit by standing still while the other four teams in the division improve?
Do I think they WILL? That's not the signals I'm getting lately. Do I think that if they had kept the team largely intact they could have? Absolutely (albeit, they wouldn't have finished 25 games back of a playoff spot with the team intact)
You speak as if it's impossible. In 2007 the Rays finished in 5th place, 30 games out. In 2008 they 31 wins and had seven more wins than they would have needed to win the Wild Card. So that's an actual swing to make the playoffs of 24.
I assume you would reply that the Rays made a lot of changes between those two years, but it's not true.
Longoria was added, true, but in my prognosis, I allow for a similar contribution from Snider as being a big element;
Garza stepped into the rotation, but he pitched about as well as Marcum typically pitches - other than those two, it was largely the same crew. On top of that, Pena, Crawford, and Upton all played noteably WORSE in 2008 than they had in 2007 so your assumption that players like Rolen and Hill would regress, even if it proved out, wouldn't prove that they couldn't do what the Rays did.
On the other hand, several relief pitchers pitched much better.
The point is, the VAST majority of the team that went from 66 wins to 97 in one year were the exact same guys.
So yeah, it's not all that unrealistic at all to have suggested that the team we had on July 30 could have finished with 75 or so wins and had made the playoffs with most of the same guys in 2010. Not at all.
and just so you know I'm not being a homer, I'd say the same thing about Baltimore. I don't THINK they will gel just yet, I'm thinking a slower ascent than the Rays demonstrated. But I wouldn't for a second think it was impossible that that young outfield, and Weiters and Roberts could team up with the improved starting staff and make a little magic. (other than the simple existance of the Red Sox and Yankees but the Rays had that to overcome too)
As far as aging another year, Hill and Lind are probably having career years. Even assuming that they will match this year next year is an aggressive assumption, if you expect them to be better you are going to be disappointed.
I doubt seriously this is Lind peak. I DO think Hill will likely never approach 40 homers again, but those will go back to being doubles and i think he might have a better OPS/OPS+ in future years than he does now.
Frankly, it's comments like that that show one to be over-compensating instead of just being unbiased. If Lind were playing for the Orioles or the Rays would you take it as a given he will never be as good again as he is at 25?
what do you think of Jabcoby Elsbury? Dustin Pedroia? Dioner Navarro? Matt Garza? Nick Markakis? Hanley Ramirez? Ryan Braun? Prince Fielder? Ryan Zimmerman? Troy Tulowitski? Adam Jones? Brian McCann? Mark Reynolds? Kendry Morales? David Wright? Zach Grienke? Josh Johnson?
Does everyone peak by 26 or just when they put on a Jays uniform?
By the way, if you argue that Can't expect Lind to get better, how can you then argue the O's are on an upward curve when so much of that potential success depends on Markakis and Jones? Why should they get better but Lind won't? Why expect more from Weiters than fron Snider?Why find 31 year old Roberts more dependable than 27 year old Hill?
***
doesn't matter how many times we beat up on the rest of the league, we keep getting nipped by the big 3 in the AL East, because, admittedly, they are better teams.
This is the first year since 2004 that the Jays have played badly against the beasts of the East.
They piled up that run differential in a small period during the year
and their record reflected what you would expect over that stretch.
My reply to that is that most every team over the course of a year will blow and and be blown out and that such things even out over time and are thus irrelevant to undermining the pythag theory.
Further, I'd suggest that the math whizes at sites like BP and BTBS and THT among many others would have long since debunked the higher-order wins stuff IF in fact it was as easy to dismiss as noting there were some blowout wins along the way.
The accumulated body of evidence shows this higher order stuff proves to be pretty predictive over time (I get the same argument thrown back at me when I'm skeptical of ZIPS in fact) so i don;t think a cavalier assumption that they are somehow more prone to the abberational blowout than other teams wil hold up.
My reply to that is that most every team over the course of a year will blow and and be blown out and that such things even out over time and are thus irrelevant to undermining the pythag theory.
Further, I'd suggest that the math whizes at sites like BP and BTBS and THT among many others would have long since debunked the higher-order wins stuff IF in fact it was as easy to dismiss as noting there were some blowout wins along the way.
The accumulated body of evidence shows this higher order stuff proves to be pretty predictive over time (I get the same argument thrown back at me when I'm skeptical of ZIPS in fact) so i don;t think a cavalier assumption that they are somehow more prone to the abberational blowout than other teams wil hold up.
what do you think of Jabcoby Elsbury? Dustin Pedroia? Dioner Navarro? Matt Garza? Nick Markakis? Hanley Ramirez? Ryan Braun? Prince Fielder? Ryan Zimmerman? Troy Tulowitski? Adam Jones? Brian McCann? Mark Reynolds? Kendry Morales? David Wright? Zach Grienke? Josh Johnson?
One of the most overrated players in baseball. 2008 peak. Yikes, who knows. Very good. Chance to be great. Probably peaked. Chance to get better. This is about his peak. Pretty good, very dependent on his defensive contribution. Chance to be extremely good. Better then I though he'd be. Eh. Hall of Famer. First 3 months of season will be the best 3 months of his career, but would love to have him. It would be hard for him to have a better season statistically then he's having this year, but could be good for a long time.
I put stock in the pythag and second and third order records. I'm up on the research.
I just don't agree with attributing all differences between your real record and your pthag record as 'luck' and 'chance'.
As for the differences between the 2007 and 2008 Rays, there are plenty.
Pena/Iwamura/Bartlett/Longoria
over
Pena/Wiggington/Harris/Iwamura
in the infield alone was HUGE upgrade
Cliff Floyd had a much better year then Greg Norton in 2007
Garza was a huge addition. Edwin Jackson was a totally different player.
Not having Delmon Young was a huge improvement. Gabe Gross was pretty good.
The bullpen totally turned over. Percival/Miller/Wheeler/Howell instead of Reyes/Glover/Stokes/Camp
So sure, they had the same team except for adding Longoria/Bartlett/Floyd/Garza/Percival/Miller/Wheeler/Howell/Gross and they removed a butcher at second with a good glove who fit better at his new position then his old.
That's 9 key contributors who weren't on the team in 2007 and they got rid of 2 of the worst defensive players in the league. Young in the outfield and Wiggington at second.
Other then that it was the same team.
By the way, if you argue that Can't expect Lind to get better, how can you then argue the O's are on an upward curve when so much of that potential success depends on Markakis and Jones? Why should they get better but Lind won't? Why expect more from Weiters than fron Snider?Why find 31 year old Roberts more dependable than 27 year old Hill?
Adam Jones is 23 an a great athlete. He's at 295/348/489. Great year. Should get better, he's only 23.
Lind is great, I expect him to continue to be great. He's at 297/361/545. He's 25 so that's 2 extra years. He's not as athletic as Jones.
Lind might get better, but I think most people will tell you that Jones has a better chance of improving more then Lind. He's 2 years younger and he's more athletic. Lind might get better and Jones might stink. Anything can happen, but the odds are on Jones' side against Lind. That doesn't mean Lind isn't going to have a great career. He's the least of the Jays' problems right now.
I expect Weiters to be better then Snider because he will be a premium glove at a premium position. Snider will be lucky to be average in an outfield corner. I think Snider will be a great player, he is the second least of the Jays' problems right now, but a potential gold glove catcher is hard to ignore.
The Orioles should have moved Roberts when they had the chance and I imagine they wish they already had. Hill will be better then Roberts going forward I think, I'm not knocking Hill, it's just hard to expect him to IMPROVE from where he is. I think if you expect a player to continue to improve after a year like Hill is having you'll most often end up disappointed. If he stays where he is he's a tremendous asset. I just wouldn't go building my strategy around him continuing to get better. The odds are against it.
Markakis is interesting, I'd term his year a bit of a disappointment. He's a pretty good data point in that you can't always expect players to improve on 306/406/491 seasons ... even if they are 24. He's a great defender a good athlete and seems to have one of the higher baseball IQs in the game. I think a lot of people are a bit suprised his numbers are down this much. I like him a lot going forward, but you can't ignore that this season hasn't been what was expected.
You keep telling me that I'm biased, but I don't see where I am. How could someone not like Weiters, Jones and Markakis? I think they are a better trio then Lind, Hill and Snider. They are three premium defensive players at 2 up the middle positions against 2 guys who don't contribute much except for the bat and one good defensive player at an up the middle position.
Seems pretty fair to have that opinion to me, and I don't see how that means I'm going too far to not be biased towards the home team or whatever I'm being accused of.
Pena/Iwamura/Bartlett/Longoria
over
Pena/Wiggington/Harris/Iwamura
in the infield alone was HUGE upgrade
Offensively the 2008 crew was WORSE overall, though the defense got better.
sticking with the theme....
Not having Delmon Young was a huge improvement. Gabe Gross was pretty good.
An OPS+ of 100 as opposed to 91 isn't "huge"
In point of fact, the total team OPS+ in 2007 was slightly HIGHER than in 2008. and they scored fewer runs in 2008. So we can despense with comments about the hitting being better.
On the pitching...
Garza was a huge addition. Edwin Jackson was a totally different player.
Garza replaced Hammel and posted a 128 ERA+, Marcum posted a 126 ERA+ in 2008 and is essentially the same level of player, and the jays have had 20 starts this year (the equivilant of one full turn in the rotation) posted by an assortment of guys who have collectively posted an ERA of 7.36 which is a full run higher than Hammel had in 2007.
As for Jackson - that sort of step up is exactly the sort of thing you would insist we CAN''T count on from any of the Jays but also the sort of thing that happens to every team that takes it to the next level. In 2007 if I had told you jackson would have a dramatic step forward which would be key to the Rays contending (or Sonnanstine) would you have acceptedthe premise? Maybe, since they aren't Blue Jays, but maybe not. but they did.
If I tell you it's possible David Purcey would take an equivilant step, you would mock. But what if I said Cecil would be a front of the rotation guy next year? that would be the same sort of leap, and more likely than that you could have predicted Jackson would get that much better (or that he would have made an even more dramatic leap this year)
your decleration the Jays have no chance dismisses all such possible improvements.
But consider - If anyone had told you a year ago that Aaron Hill would not only play ball in 2009 but make a run at 40 homers, would you not have mocked?
The bullpen totally turned over. Percival/Miller/Wheeler/Howell instead of Reyes/Glover/Stokes/Camp
Percival's ERA+ was virtually identical to Reyes and Wheeler, Balfour, and Howell were on the 2007 team - they just sucked too badly to get the most innings. If I tell you the Jay's bullpen in 2010 will get many quality innings from Brian Wolfe - you'd rightly be skeptical if not incredulous - yet it's exactly the same thing as me saying in 2007 that Grant Balfour would be a key reliever for the championship Rays.
More to the point, we already have good relievers so it doesn't even take a stretch to imagin having a good pen next year.
In any case, the point is that the 13 most important pitchers on the 2008 Rays, 11 of them were members of the 2007 Rays.
Which was what I said to begin with - the offense didn't get better, and the part of the team that did get better did so with almost entierly the same group of players.
Seems pretty fair to have that opinion to me, and I don't see how that
means I'm going too far to not be biased towards the home team or
whatever I'm being accused of.
Nothing wrong with liking the O's Trio...even arguably liking them better given that Hill's already in his prime years.
What I am accusing you of is over-compensating against homerism - being an "anti-homer" if you will.
It's really not a sin to be hopeful that the players on your favorite team turn out to be good players too.
sure they MIGHT disappoint - any young player might. the Jays have just as much reason to be hopeful about, for instance, Romero and Cecil and Stewart as the O's do about their young pitching - or as optimistic about Snider's overall value as Weiter's.
Nothing wrong with liking the O's Trio...even arguably liking them better given that Hill's already in his prime years.
What I am accusing you of is over-compensating against homerism - being an "anti-homer" if you will.
It's really not a sin to be hopeful that the players on your favorite team turn out to be good players too.
sure they MIGHT disappoint - any young player might. the Jays have just as much reason to be hopeful about, for instance, Romero and Cecil and Stewart as the O's do about their young pitching - or as optimistic about Snider's overall value as Weiter's.
I like how Marcum can be plugged into the rotation with a 126 ERA+. Just ignore the Tommy John surgery, I'm sure he'll come back exactly the same pitcher he was when he left.
It's really not a sin to be hopeful that the players on your favorite team turn out to be good players too.
Hill and Lind are already very good players. They are good players to the point where not many players get much better then they already are.
I think Snider is going to be very good. I think Cecil is going to be very good. I think Zep could be very good.
I'm hopeful that all three of them become all-stars. It just doesn't usually work out that way and that risk needs to be accounted for when you are planning for the future.
I'm pessimistic about the Jays, but I'm not arguing that Hill and Lind aren't huge assets and that Snider should be very good and that some decent percentage of the pitchers will be good. The problem is that there is no depth going forward, zero strength up the middle besides Hill going forward and one of the thinnest rosters in the league that could be decimated by a couple of injuries.
I don't always agree with Joe Sheehan at BP, but I think he's on the mark here:
"Alex Rios is a decent baseball player, largely because he’s a terrific defensive right fielder and would be a good center fielder. He doesn’t draw enough walks or hit the ball in the air enough to fully capitalize on his talents, and because of this, he falls short of being a superstar. His contract, signed at the apex of his perceived value, only makes sense if he performs at the level at which he peaked, and few players sustain that kind of work. The Blue Jays will be rebuilding to one extent or another, and are better off for the $61 million that they’ll save and for now being able to get both Adam Lind and Travis Snider into the lineup simultaneously. The White Sox threw them a rope; however, it’s high time J.P. Ricciardi stopped doing things that require him to be rescued."
"Alex Rios is a decent baseball player, largely because he’s a terrific defensive right fielder and would be a good center fielder. He doesn’t draw enough walks or hit the ball in the air enough to fully capitalize on his talents, and because of this, he falls short of being a superstar. His contract, signed at the apex of his perceived value, only makes sense if he performs at the level at which he peaked, and few players sustain that kind of work. The Blue Jays will be rebuilding to one extent or another, and are better off for the $61 million that they’ll save and for now being able to get both Adam Lind and Travis Snider into the lineup simultaneously. The White Sox threw them a rope; however, it’s high time J.P. Ricciardi stopped doing things that require him to be rescued."
I'm curious where this notion that Rios was holding Snider back came from. Call me crazy, but I would have guessed that Inglett-Bautista were keeping his spot warm.
Joe Sheehan has been writing that Edwin Encarnacion is the second coming for years, so hopefully he's right about that.
I like how Marcum can be plugged into the rotation with a 126 ERA+.
Just ignore the Tommy John surgery, I'm sure he'll come back exactly
the same pitcher he was when he left.
Certainly not every pitcher comes back just the same the first year back, but some do. My suggestions about next year are that the POSSIBILITY exists (or existed) - you reject pretty flatly that the possibility - the POSSIBILITY - exists. It seems to me that it is YOU who are making the greater assumption.
I'm pessimistic about the Jays, but I'm not arguing that Hill and Lind aren't huge assets and that Snider should be very good and that some decent percentage of the pitchers will be good. The problem is that there is no depth going forward, zero strength up the middle besides Hill going forward and one of the thinnest rosters in the league that could be decimated by a couple of injuries.
And? How well will the Rays do next year if Garza and Shields go down to arm surgery?
How will the O's do if Markakis misses most of the season, and/or Jones? Is Felix Pie the guy who'll step in and they won't miss a beat?
Certainly not every pitcher comes back just the same the first year back, but some do. My suggestions about next year are that the POSSIBILITY exists (or existed) - you reject pretty flatly that the possibility - the POSSIBILITY - exists. It seems to me that it is YOU who are making the greater assumption.
I'm pessimistic about the Jays, but I'm not arguing that Hill and Lind aren't huge assets and that Snider should be very good and that some decent percentage of the pitchers will be good. The problem is that there is no depth going forward, zero strength up the middle besides Hill going forward and one of the thinnest rosters in the league that could be decimated by a couple of injuries.
And? How well will the Rays do next year if Garza and Shields go down to arm surgery?
How will the O's do if Markakis misses most of the season, and/or Jones? Is Felix Pie the guy who'll step in and they won't miss a beat?
That's a strong statement and needs to be backed up by evidence. As far
as I can tell (and all I do is read the Economist regularly) is that
Obama is following pretty much tried and true Keynesian economics.
There's no hit of him or the democrats in the house/senate making
things worse.
I'm not an Economist and I doon't rear The Economist.
All I know is what common sense tells me. Without diverting this thread itno the political nuts and bolts, just consider this - in 2006 the Democrats (rightly) made tremendous hay out of "runnaway spending" by Republicans running up the defiicit.
Now, in a much much worse economy, the same people are spending in ways that make the spending in 2006 look like a Yard Sale.
One doesn't have to be an economist to know if they were right then, that there must be something wrong with what's going on now.
There's a lot of other rather twisted logic going on (the insanity that is the "Cash for Clunkers" business which is the one thing they are most proud of, for instance) but there's no way to parse it all out here.
Besides, I can't prove common sense with Keynesian evidence - one either sees it or one doesn't.
(which isn't to say you lack common sense, it's just to say that the nature of common sense is that you aren't supposed to have to explain it - it's supposed to be obvious)
I'm not an Economist and I doon't rear The Economist.
All I know is what common sense tells me. Without diverting this thread itno the political nuts and bolts, just consider this - in 2006 the Democrats (rightly) made tremendous hay out of "runnaway spending" by Republicans running up the defiicit.
Now, in a much much worse economy, the same people are spending in ways that make the spending in 2006 look like a Yard Sale.
One doesn't have to be an economist to know if they were right then, that there must be something wrong with what's going on now.
There's a lot of other rather twisted logic going on (the insanity that is the "Cash for Clunkers" business which is the one thing they are most proud of, for instance) but there's no way to parse it all out here.
Besides, I can't prove common sense with Keynesian evidence - one either sees it or one doesn't.
(which isn't to say you lack common sense, it's just to say that the nature of common sense is that you aren't supposed to have to explain it - it's supposed to be obvious)
No word yet as to whether Rios, when headed for Seattle where the White Sox are playing, took a lazy route to the city, heading off towards Denver before overrunning Seattle and ending up in Vancouver, where he promptly threw his luggage back home - or close to it as it tailed off towards Tacoma.
Very good!
Rios didn't get into last night's game. Is he even in Seattle yet? Why do I picture him still wandering Pearson, looking for his gate?
Sure, if Baltimore and Tampa get hit with injuries then they are screwed. How about the other teams you need to chase? What happens if the Yankees lose A-Rod and Wang? It's not like I'm projecting Baltimore to go on a run a make the playoffs a bunch of times. I just think they are going to be better then they have been over the last decade. They could top out in 3rd place at 86-88 wins in say 2012 or something like that and never make a real run at a playoff spot. Tampa's window could already be closing. When they start to churn this roster if they don't make good deals their run could be over before it gets started. Sounds like they will be looking to move Crawford in the offseason, hopefully for them they get more then Toronto got for Rios.
Toronto is extremely thin now. They are only going to be thinner next year, and the lack of depth in the bullpen could be a huge issue. The fact they keep giving Jesse Carlson the ball this year is a scary proposition. Even with a halfway decent bullpen this year they don't have the depth in AAA to make the obvious move that he needs to be replaced. How about next year when the numbers aren't going to allow them to spend this much money on the bullpen?
Toronto is extremely thin now. They are only going to be thinner next year, and the lack of depth in the bullpen could be a huge issue. The fact they keep giving Jesse Carlson the ball this year is a scary proposition. Even with a halfway decent bullpen this year they don't have the depth in AAA to make the obvious move that he needs to be replaced. How about next year when the numbers aren't going to allow them to spend this much money on the bullpen?
The Carlson situation has little to do with the team's long-term difficulties. The club is deep in pitchers, and a replacement for Carlson could easily be found if Cito wanted to make a change.
The long-term difficulties are a lack of position players at the defensive skill positions (with the exception of Aaron Hill) and a lack of budgetary room. These are, I agree, very serious difficulties.
The long-term difficulties are a lack of position players at the defensive skill positions (with the exception of Aaron Hill) and a lack of budgetary room. These are, I agree, very serious difficulties.
The Carlson situation has little to do with the team's long-term difficulties.
Carlson himself will have no impact on the future. Looks like Cito & JP will though and the fact that they haven't even attempted to fix that problem doesn't exactly inspire confidence.
Will,
While I'm no economist, I do have a degree in Economics and while we shouldn't be getting into it here - I agree 100% with everything you said. The American government's actions kept the recession from being as deep as it potentially could have been, but the monetary policy is going to create a long slow recovery because of the inflation and energy price risks. I do also think that we'll see consumer spending stay low until house prices recover. It won't be permanent, but I think the memory of watching home prices crater will linger for a while.
Frankly I'm glad I don't ever have to see another Rios being Rios moment hurt the Jays. He has the lowest Baseball IQ I've ever seen in a baseball player. Outside of not running hard, adventures in the OF, I have no idea why a professional player wouldn't tag up from 3rd on a deep flyball with only 1 out.
I thought the contract extension was solid at the time but it's a horrible contract at the moment. The Jays were sinking and Kenny Williams provided a rescue boat. This was another highly questionable contract by the GM. There's always the chance RIos could go back to the 2006 version but I wouldn't want to pay him to find out.
The big question is if ownership will put these savings back into the club whether it be free agents, picking up salary in a trade, draft, and/or international free agents. I have a feeling the answer will be no though.
I thought the contract extension was solid at the time but it's a horrible contract at the moment. The Jays were sinking and Kenny Williams provided a rescue boat. This was another highly questionable contract by the GM. There's always the chance RIos could go back to the 2006 version but I wouldn't want to pay him to find out.
The big question is if ownership will put these savings back into the club whether it be free agents, picking up salary in a trade, draft, and/or international free agents. I have a feeling the answer will be no though.
I thought the contract extension was solid at the time but it's a
horrible contract at the moment. The Jays were sinking and Kenny
Williams provided a rescue boat. This was another highly questionable
contract by the GM.
Um....the WHAT now?
The only way that you can mean both of these as stated is if you are blatantly judging the move in hindsight which is grossly unfair no matter how bad the perp is.
If you thought it was solid then, you have no grounds to question him now, and vice versa.
You can say "turns out it didn't work out" but you can't expect him to have been more clarvoiant than you were.
I remember times when people said of the Thomas deal, or the Ryan deal, or the Burnett deal that it was a bad idea WHEN it was signed - but if someone was supportive then, then the only thing to do is have your own helping of crow right alongside JP when it doesn't work out.
Um....the WHAT now?
The only way that you can mean both of these as stated is if you are blatantly judging the move in hindsight which is grossly unfair no matter how bad the perp is.
If you thought it was solid then, you have no grounds to question him now, and vice versa.
You can say "turns out it didn't work out" but you can't expect him to have been more clarvoiant than you were.
I remember times when people said of the Thomas deal, or the Ryan deal, or the Burnett deal that it was a bad idea WHEN it was signed - but if someone was supportive then, then the only thing to do is have your own helping of crow right alongside JP when it doesn't work out.
I'll put up $100 cdn to the first person who will put up $200...
Jays finish ahead of Orioles in 2010, you get $100.
Orioles finish ahead of Jays in 2010, I get $200.
Jays finish ahead of Orioles in 2010, you get $100.
Orioles finish ahead of Jays in 2010, I get $200.
Robert, you already made that prediction for 2009. And I offered you a wager at the time, and you didn't accept it. Why now the postponement to 2010?
Um....the WHAT now?
The only way that you can mean both of these as stated is if you are blatantly judging the move in hindsight which is grossly unfair no matter how bad the perp is.
If you thought it was solid then, you have no grounds to question him now, and vice versa.
You can say "turns out it didn't work out" but you can't expect him to have been more clarvoiant than you were.
I remember times when people said of the Thomas deal, or the Ryan deal, or the Burnett deal that it was a bad idea WHEN it was signed - but if someone was supportive then, then the only thing to do is have your own helping of crow right alongside JP when it doesn't work out.
I wouldn't go so far to say I have no grounds to question him now. I'm just a fan while JP has the power to actually make player moves. Would I have offered Rios that extension? Probably. Does it look like a poor contract today? Yes. If it makes anybody sleep better at night, I have no problem admitting I wasn't exactly 100% right in terms of how the contract has worked out for the Jays.
The fact is that JP has made too many questionable free agent signings/extensions (AJ, Wells, Rios, Ryan, Thomas, etc...). At what point does Ownership decide it might be a good idea to change the direction of the club with a new GM? If a sub .500 record during JP's tenure or not a single meaningful game in August isn't enough, when is it time to give him his walking papers?
The only way that you can mean both of these as stated is if you are blatantly judging the move in hindsight which is grossly unfair no matter how bad the perp is.
If you thought it was solid then, you have no grounds to question him now, and vice versa.
You can say "turns out it didn't work out" but you can't expect him to have been more clarvoiant than you were.
I remember times when people said of the Thomas deal, or the Ryan deal, or the Burnett deal that it was a bad idea WHEN it was signed - but if someone was supportive then, then the only thing to do is have your own helping of crow right alongside JP when it doesn't work out.
I wouldn't go so far to say I have no grounds to question him now. I'm just a fan while JP has the power to actually make player moves. Would I have offered Rios that extension? Probably. Does it look like a poor contract today? Yes. If it makes anybody sleep better at night, I have no problem admitting I wasn't exactly 100% right in terms of how the contract has worked out for the Jays.
The fact is that JP has made too many questionable free agent signings/extensions (AJ, Wells, Rios, Ryan, Thomas, etc...). At what point does Ownership decide it might be a good idea to change the direction of the club with a new GM? If a sub .500 record during JP's tenure or not a single meaningful game in August isn't enough, when is it time to give him his walking papers?