http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2009/08/angels-release-justin-speier.html

The Jays made out like bandits with those draft picks rather than keeping Frank and Justin Speier. Both of them have been released after having been signed as type-A free agents.

Does it seem like these Yankees win an unusually high number of games in their final at bat this year? 

groove, in a very un-Mags way, I did a spot-check on the one stat that might shed light on this -- save opportunities. Mo Rivera is not only leading the AL in saves, he's second in save chances (he's 33/34).  Now, granted, this stat-check only works, even theoretically, with last-at-bat walkoff wins, where there can be no save opportunity, but that's how I read your question. Correct me if I'm wrong!

Richard Griffin was on McCwon last night and while Griffin didn't say anything of interest, McCown sure did.  Now I understand that McCown likes to be a contrarian but he does count Beeston as a friend andI I think he lives on the same street as Phil Lind, the Rogers exec who convinced Ted Rogers to buy the Jays, so he does have connections.  Here's a summary of whart he said and, by the way, McCown is no fan of JP.

• The only thing offered by the Sox for Rios were their bad contracts
• Beeston was behind the letting go of Rios as he didn't like the contract and not for payroll cutting reasons
• The coaching staff were down on Rios because he wouldn't listen or work hard
• JP would not be back next year as GM
• The player salaries budget would be $100-120M for 2010 according to his sources.

The last point would be a stunning turn of events.  I don't know what to make of it since it contradicts was was announced at the Rogers general meeting a few weeks ago (costs need to be more in line with revenue).  I'm pretty sure that Beeston has such respect at Rogers that if he asked for this budget  he would get it .  They'd love for him to stay on as President of the team.

• JP would not be back next year as GM
• The player salaries budget would be $100-120M for 2010 according to his sources.

At least they came to their senses on Marcum. That August talk was crazy.

If he didn't have any setbacks, and that was his prescribed rehab schedule, why is that crazy? It wasn't like they were rushing him - he just gave no reason to slow it down. The setbacks (even minor or unrelated ones) are what affect the timetable more than anything else. We see that with his back. By having his start abbreviated and taking a turn off, he won't build up enough arm strength by the end of the minor league year.

If he didn't have any setbacks, and that was his prescribed rehab schedule, why is that crazy? It wasn't like they were rushing him - he just gave no reason to slow it down. The setbacks (even minor or unrelated ones) are what affect the timetable more than anything else. We see that with his back. By having his start abbreviated and taking a turn off, he won't build up enough arm strength by the end of the minor league year.

Once July came and the Jays faded there was no point in rushing him back to the major leagues.  People seem to act like TJ surgery isn't a big deal anymore and it's just a blip.   What would have been the benefit of Marcum coming back 2-3 months faster then the average rehabilitation?  To push himself in meaningless games at the major league level? 

If he's totally healthy it's probably not a big deal, but why even take the chance that rushing him could set him back going into 2010? 

What would have been the benefit of Marcum coming back 2-3 months faster then the average rehabilitation?

I'm not saying to push him back. I'm saying if he was following the TJ rehab schedule, had no setbacks, and is ready to pitch, why not? We agree that rushing him back is beyond-dumb. But if he's not rushed and is simply not experiencing any setbacks to slow his table down (arm-related or no), then what's the point of holding him back? He gets some time to have a warm-fuzzy at the end of the year, and you get a better idea of where he's at before the winter. This is all moot, of course, since he had a setback (non-arm category, thankfully) as quite a few TJers do. This has pushed back his time table, and it makes no sense to try to fit him in for a start or two.

I assume it's because it is a major surgery that most experience setbacks, making the time-frame longer than its rehab schedule. With this setback, for example, he'd probably shut it down for a couple starts, then be back to a 2-3 inning stint, still a month away from being in starting shape. If it's were arm, this delay in starting up might be longer as might be the prescribed arm-strength-building schedule.

True, we aren't doctors and don't have access anyway, so it's all just a guessing game.  He was SO FAR ahead of the usual TJ rehab that either there is something very special about his case or they were pushing things quickly. 

It seems like the Jays have had a lot of pitchers injured pretty seriously over the past few years.  Is it Arnsberg?  Is it the training staff?  Is it even true, or is it a misconception?  I have no idea, but I won't have a ton of faith in them unless pitchers stop getting hurt or someone shows me this isn't a lot of pitching injuries. 

Since I don't have a ton of faith in them and Marcum seemed to be coming back much faster then 99% of the other cases it isn't a leap to think that maybe it's not the best idea in the world. 

• The player salaries budget would be $100-120M for 2010 according to his sources.

I'd be really surprised if Milwaukee DFAed him without having a plan on where they are sending him.  If he's available for the minimum, yeah he'd be great to take a flier on, but I'd be shocked if they ate that much money.

won't have a ton of faith in them unless pitchers stop getting hurt or someone shows me this isn't a lot of pitching injuries.

The lack of faith is certainly understandable. The general timeframes I read, though, are for 10-14 months (presumably the high point to allow for slower healers, mechanical adjustments, and / or minor setbacks). This would have made Marcum's August no-setback timeframe perfectly reasonable. Hudson's looking at about a year, and that's being older and experiencing a non-arm (groin) setback.

Why would they release Rios if the Payroll is going up??

American League East Right Field production by team...   I haven't had time to digest the hard ball times analysis that shows Rios is worth it, but it doesn't make sense to me that Rios could be worth 11 million when NY (Swisher) and Tampa (the Gabes) are getting better performance on the cheap.  Drew and Markakis are signed to long term contracts at a similar price to Rios.

NY .257 .373 .479 .853
Bos.266 .367 .479 .847
Tmp .264 .361 .437 .798
Tor .259 .314 .420 .733
Bal .298 .353 .464 .817 

I'd be really surprised if Milwaukee DFAed him without having a plan on where they are sending him.

You might be right. I wonder if DFAing him would allow them to trade him sans-waivers. I suppose it's possible, since it would remove him from the 40-man roster. Given his performances, though, I can also see them just wanting to get him off the roster.

I wonder if DFAing him would allow them to trade him sans-waivers. I suppose it's possible, since it would remove him from the 40-man roster. Given his performances, though, I can also see them just wanting to get him off the roster.

In the video on brewers.com, Doug Melvin says Hall will be released if they don't find a taker for him.  According to the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, they'd be eating all of his $6.8 million dollar salary for this season and next season for $8.4-million dollars. 

Bill Hall and JJ Hardy for E5 and a prospect (Purcey?) with the Brewers eating the 2010 salary difference between BH and EE (as well as the 2009 diff). This way, Bill Hall's salary isn't a total loss and they have EE at 3rd if McGehee needs to play some 2nd or as insurance. Then the Jays can offer arb. to Scoot, take the picks and quite possibly get more SS production for less money in 2010 from Hardy than they would have from Scutaro. And hopefully this gives the Jays the impetus to get a real 3B (or trade for a prospect)

Hardy is worth something...but how much exactly? How much more is he really worth than Khalil Greene was last year?

I'm still in favour for keeping Scutaro because even though he is unlikely as hell to repeat this year...if he did...he'd likely earn most of the money in a 3 year contract in ONE season. And there are probably only a handful of teams (i.e. Red Sox) that would consider giving up their first rounder for Scutaro (most above .500 teams have a SS).

I wonder what Guerrero would cost in free agency and how many years he would require. I believe Olney suggsted 2/15 earlier. He may be declining, but he still had a very solid year last year and has been coming on lately. On a one year deal I'd do it...though I doubt he takes only a one year deal...and this is based on the far-fetched notion of a $120 million payroll...

Bill Hall and JJ Hardy for E5 and a prospect (Purcey?) with the Brewers eating the 2010 salary difference between BH and EE (as well as the 2009 diff).

I imagine the Brewers can do a lot better for Hardy.

How much more is he really worth than Khalil Greene was last year?

Greene started the 2009 season at age 29. Hardy will start the 2010 season at age 27.

Last year Greene was a 28-year-old shortstop coming off a season where he had an OPS+ of 64. The previous three years he had hovered around 100 (95, 97, 100) in a tough hitter's park, but he had also struggled with injuries and was known to be having some psychological issues.

This year JJ Hardy is a 26-year-old shortstop with a 75 OPS+. However, he doesn't have Greene's fragile history and in the previous two seasons he had put up an OPS+ of 100 and 113. Even with his struggles this year he's worth far more than Greene was.

Milwaukee doesn't need Encarnacion. They have Mat Gamel as their 3B of the future and can ride McGehee's hot hand for the next little while, if they choose. Encarnacion wouldn't start over either of those two and what use is a reserve making nearly $5 million who can only play third base? Encarnacion and Purcey wouldn't get you Hardy alone. It might well get you Hardy if you took Hall as well, but the Jays can't take on $17 million over the next two seasons for him.

Encarnacion wouldn't start over either of those two and what use is a reserve making nearly $5 million who can only play third base? Encarnacion and Purcey wouldn't get you Hardy alone. It might well get you Hardy if you took Hall as well, but the Jays can't take on $17 million over the next two seasons for him.

Obviously this is just a random idea. The point is that they get EE for the exact amount of money they are throwing away for releasing Hall. That is worth something, is it not? Not as much as Hardy perhaps, but something because otherwise Hall is going to be a complete loss. These types of trades never happen (as far as I can tell)...so just to put it out is obviously...just to put something out...

Something more realistic is giving them a bullpen arm...is League too much? Too little?

Personally, I still want to see Scutaro back...but Hardy fits the MO better, espescially if he won't reach free agency until after 2011 if he doesn't accumulate the necessary service time this season.

At his age, and with only 1 bad season after 2 good ones, I'd be very interested in Hardy.

On the other hand, the trend in Hall's batting average the last 5 seasons, .291, .270, .254, .225, .201 spells D-O-N-E to me.

Rios' first game with the Sox tonight - strikeout swinging, strikeout looking, flyout into double play, ground out.

Nice to see Ruiz get a shot at showing what he can do after such a good AAA season.  What have they got to lose?  He does look like breaking stuff fools him a bit, but he's not alone there.

A cheery article from Neyer

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/sweetspot/0-4-162/Baseball-s-worst--Ricciardis-.html

The only point I would make on this - and it has been made to death, is that unless you are going to be a top 5 payroll club you cannot afford to give out a contract which in a possible downside scenario, can financially cripple the club.

None of Halladay's extensions could have crippled the Jays given the dollar amounts.

The disadvantages of going year to year and the 2 picks at FA loss are, in almost any scenario, not enough to warrant giving anyone a deal that can cripple you. The only time you consider it is a track record of true elite performance (and I'm thinking Sure-fire H-O-F Pujols level)

What made it worse in Wells case was doing the deal a year before he was a FA - de-risking the transaction for Wells and giving one less evaluation year (to establish true performance level) 

I don't mind the Rios dump - it was signed in different times and frankly we can't accept the risk of that one going south too, It's reactionary and arguably wrong to say it, but I also think that Management needs to let the team know that it needs to perform. Rios' constant blunders and 'potential' are not going to work any more. Some say Rios looked effortless and so got criticised but I just think having Wells and Rios around was becoming a sign of failure.

I just don't think we should be so scared of people leaving - take the picks and the financial flexibility and move on. Go over slot in the draft, spend on international development and build.

The only guy we can't replace we just jerked around in stupid non-sensical fashion - going the Fernandez publicity-light  route while publicly stating we're not trading Roy was the only (sane) option.

Unfortunately JP seems to like the lime light a little too much for his (or the franchise's good)

Everybody is just assuming that Halladay would have re-signed in the spring of 2006 if the Blue Jays had just muddled along without giving out any potentially "crippling" contracts (those would be the ones that don't work out; the ones that work out are solid investments).

Recall that Burnett and Ryan were signed in the fall of 2005. Maybe Halladay decides to walk otherwise. Maybe some commitments were made to him about trying to become a contender.

Wow, check out these comments on Rios from the recent Jason Stark column:

Rios is guaranteed $12 million to $12.5 million every year from 2011 to 2014. And that's star money. But is he magically going to turn back into a star just because he's playing for Ozzie Guillen, in a hitters' paradise? Not if these reviews from ex-teammates are accurate:

• "He's not a winning-type player. He's a guy who just doesn't have that burning desire to win, or be great."

• "He was a guy who just didn't go after it. He'd be sleeping in his locker 10 minutes before he had to go out on the field. And not just once."

• "He wasn't the same player after he got that [seven-year] contract. It sure seemed like he was a lot more motivated when he was looking for a contract than he was since he got the contract."

Meanwhile, scouts we surveyed seemed dubious, too.

"This guy should be a perennial 30-30 [HR-SB] guy," said one. "But to me, he's a classic underachiever. If Ozzie takes the wrong approach, he's going to lose him. He's a guy you've got to go real slow with. But whether Ozzie has that kind of patience, boy, I don't know."</i>

The anonymous quotes from ex-teammates are interesting.  Similarly, I always wondered about Rios playing with his toy helicopters and toy airplanes on the pitcher's mound and the stadium hallways after the games.  Not the best sign of a focused or motivated player, I always thought.

 Still, the reality is that it's a salary dump, not a baseball decision.  I might be persuaded that it was a purely baseball decision if it was only Rios who was dumped -- and not Rolen, not the near-trade of Halladay, not the refusal to pursue any free agents or any well-paid hitters in trade talks.  Taken all together, it's obvious that Rogers has put the almighty dollar ahead of everything else.  Rogers has calculated the Jays revenue -- from attendance, TV, the league etc -- and has calculated that the revenue can't get much lower, no matter how the Jays do on the field.  Revenue MIGHT get higher if the Jays are a contender, but Rogers doesn't like anything with a little risk attached to it.  So, play it safe, reap the dollars, and screw the baseball team. Typical Canadian corporate management.

The reality is that Rogers has hugely benefited from lucrative privileges that it received from the government (and, by extension, the taxpayers).  It got a lucrative wireless phone license.  It got TV licenses. And it got a baseball stadium for peanuts, after the taxpayers had sunk $200-million into the thing.  When the government is so generous to Rogers, why can't the company take a bit of its profits and sink it into an extra $20 or $30 million in payroll for the baseball team? It would be good for the public, good for the taxpayers -- a small return on our generous assistance to the Rogers corporate empire.  Come on, Rogers -- think about the people who elected the governments that gave you those very profitable cash machines.