Could Butter be in line to replace Cito?  Thus they made him keep him around for one more year but got him out of the seat next to Cito and back on the field.

I am greatly disappointed that Cito is coming back for one more year.  This is supposed to be a change of direction year, but it's looking like one more year of the same old.   If I had season tickets I'd cancel them.  Other then to thank him for his earlier services, what possible benefit is there to bring him back for one more year knowing it's his last year when the jays are more then a year away either in rebuilding or contending whichever they eventually decide to try and do.

Losing Arnsberg and Butterfield taking a reduced role because of Cito.

Neither is a good sign. With respect to the coaching staff I'm pining for the John Gibbons days. Yikes.

More from Bastian:

Anthopoulos said Astros asked for permission to talk to Texas-native Arnsberg, who is close friends with new Houston manager Brad Mills.

Why Cito is back.....

Beeston loves him

Cito it well liked in Toronto

You can't fire the manager who won two world series for you

You can't make it appear that the players ran him out of town

You can't make it appear the players are in charge

Cito is too proud to quit under these circumstances, if he was to be fired it would be ugly

Managers aren't that important anyway

I think that losing Arnsberg is going to hurt the pitching staff.  You could argue that Romero's improvement was Arnserberg's doing, and I'm concerned that Romero will regress now.  With the likely loss of Doc, the starting staff could be weak.

I think Arnsberg would have left anyway, regardless of who was the manager. Maybe not if it was another friend of his and maybe not if Butterfield, but I wouldn't have been surprised if he joined the Astros if the Jays had let Cito go and had hired, say, Eric Wedge or another random managerial candidate.

As for Butterfield, I have no idea if he wants to manage or not, but I would expect, like most coaches, he'd like the chance someday. I wouldn't be surprised if he moved on after 2010 if he's not appointed manager. He's been here a while and has seen several people get their chance. If he doesn't get the job for 2011 I could see him moving on to somewhere else and hoping to make an impression there. This is just pure speculation.

I'm interested to see Walton as the pitching coach. From what I've read or heard, most of the pitchers have a very good relationship with him and he's been in the bullpen for a long time. However, I don't know much about his philosophies or what effect he has had on particular pitchers, which I imagine is just the result of the fact that nobody really writes about bullpen coaches.

Also, while it was possible it would have gotten quite ugly if they had forced Cito out, I do think that there was an opportunity with Beeston as President. It would have been much more difficult with a new President and Anthopolous being a new GM, but Beeston was one of the few people who could have done it.

For whatever reason(s) he and AA decided it either wasn't the right decision or wasn't worth the fallout.

Whatever. There'll still be time to fire him in July when the Jays are 49-54.

Giving Cito a four-year deal for consulting after 2010 makes it quite a bit less likely that the Jays will consider firing him during the season, no?

I was hoping to see the headline here: Cito signs four-year extension and witness the panic that would ensue. On the bright side, he's guaranteed to be out of the manager's chair --but only if the team stopped playing for him and called a mutiny (hmmmm...sounds familiar) on the man could I see him stepping aside in 2010. How would the guy want his swan song season as manager be one in which he gets fired ...  He either walks away into the sunset on his own or he says goodbye in October, I say. Only to hang around for four more years.

I think that losing Arnsberg is going to hurt the pitching staff.

Maybe yes, maybe no. Youneverknow.

Where was he before he came to Toronto, and what did those guys do without him?

First you must consider how so many pitchers got injured.   What responsibility did Arnsberg have, as opposed to the responsibility of the entire Pitching Coaches' Staffs.   Second,it appears Arnsberg's simple adjustments to Romero's pitching turned a borderline major leaguer into a front line Starter.   How on earth was this missed for so long?   There are enough problems existing in pitching in Toronto's System to warrant major changes, from top to bottom.   I think he may well have taken Houston's offer, no matter what.   Of course, now Toronto and Houston will be trade partners for a while.   (Toronto & Washington too).   May we live in interesting times!

This isn't directed at everyone here, but I've been getting the feeling that people are really down about Arnsberg leaving.

Why? There isn't anything objective that us mortal fans can argue for or against Arnsberg with. From reading articles and listening to interviews, I can only determine that Brad Arnsberg watched a lot of tape and that the players like Arnsberg a lot. And that just isn't enough for me to be sad (or happy) about his departure.

And if it's any consolation to those saddened by these events, Bruce Walton has had five years to pick and choose all the good things he saw in Arnsberg to use for the future.

It's definatly not the end of the  world, and there may be some unforseen positives in this. But when you have an area that is sucessfull its dissapointing to see things changed. Now maybe alot of undue credit was givin to Arnsberg. I have no doubt he is a good coach, but would have Romero never figured it out with all the talent he has? Thats tough to say, I think he would have eventually learned with another coach here.  A coach can only do so much, alot depends on the players he has to work with, and Arnsberg has had a talented pitching staff for the past few years.

Vernon Wells haters, will enjoy this!

http://www.torontosun.com/sports/columnists/bob_elliott/2009/10/31/11588066-sun.html

On a talent basis I don't know if i like it but it will clear the books of alot of moeny and give AA a clean slate to do what he wants with this team.

VBF, rightly or wrongly, man posters on the Box have indicated a belief in two of our coaches over the last few years - Arnsberg and his ability to work with young / marginal pitchers, and Butterfield and with his superior ability to coach defense.  I can't recall these assumptions every being questioned here and I certainly heard positive comments about Arnsberg at BP - along with some questions as to why so many of his staff got injured.  As someone involved in amateur sports, I certainly believe that an elite coach can have a significant impact on an athlete.  The case of Ricky Romero is about the clearest indicator of that I can think of, and Arnsberg helped lure Burnett here, so the man has definately had a more objectively significant impact on this team then any coach in some time.  Given this, it's not surprising at all that I and others are sad to see him go.       

Overall, this move signals that the management team strongly supports Cito, which, given his glaringly obvious flaws, seems a concern.  It should also be good for the clubhouse and maintaining the sense that management is in charge (rather than the players) which is a good thing.  Arnsberg may have left anyway, as others have noted.

Also I have to wonder if management feels there IS a connection between Arnsberg's coaching and pitching injuries?  Rightly or wrongly, this notion may grow in strength if the Jays can finally have some luck on the pitching-injury front this year.

It would be easy to call the Monopoly-game magnet a cancer, but so what.
If the mutinous end the Jays season was true, there's plenty of sickness to go around.
I'm not sure I would eat a lot of money, but wouldn't it be nice to be out from under Wells' contract.
And he can go to the National (AAAA) League and hit 320 with 32 dingers and 75 RBI.
He can't be worse in the clubhouse than old Monopoly Money, so the Cubs fans will fall in love with him.
The Jays?
They get a mess, but a movable mess.

If the Jays trade Wells for Bradley, they might not particularly care whether Bradley does anything for them - they'd just be looking to save money on the Wells contract. If Bradley actually does anything, that would be a bonus.

But if the Jays trade Wells, they'll lose a convenient scapegoat/excuse: "We would have done better in (2010, 2011, 2012), if we hadn't had all that money tied up in Vernon Wells' contract."

As for Butterfield and Arnsberg:

• I think the best evidence that Butters is a good coach is that both Aaron Hill and Orlando Hudson turned into awesome defensive second basemen on his watch. Of course, both those players might just have had amazing natural talent, but neither of them were second basemen throughout their minor league careers.
• I have always wondered whether Arnsberg was basically offering what was a Faustian bargain to pitchers: he could teach them how to be better, but at the cost of winding up on the DL. Of the Jays' many pitching prospects who have gone on the shelf, I seem to recall that only McGowan was expected to be something special. I don't recall that Litsch or Marcum were rated that highly, for instance.
  

These moves portend the long-term rebuilding of the club.  Cito agrees to be a consultant after 2010, and the Jays apparently will not be attempting to compete in 2010.  That is fine with me.  Like Dave Till, I have always had a mixed view of Brad Arnsberg's work and a very positive view of Brian Butterfield's.  If the bargain in the third base/bench coach swap is that Butter is the Manager after 2010, then that move make sense.  I would like to see Butterfield around when the next young shortstop arrives. 

As for Bruce Walton as pitching coach, I know nothing.  It would be great if someone at the Box could get a chance to interview him about throwing patterns/injury avoidance, repertoire additions/injury avoidance, usage/injury avoidance, and any interest he has in the sabermetric side (eg pitch fx...)

It'll be interesting to see if the pitching injuries lessen without Arnsberger.  I don't think there was anything you could, from afar, point to that was being done wrong, but the results speak for themselves.

I'm not sure how I feel about Cito coming back.  Did they discuss changes that need to be made, or is Cito given full reign to continue to make moves like he did this year?

At the very least, it's good that the players don't get the impression that they run the ship.

And if that Wells for Bradley swap is close to being true the Jays should do it in a heartbeat, even if they just acquire Bradley and release him.  If Wells was part of the 'mutiny', it's even more of a priority.  Wells seems to be one of the 'leaders' on the team, but that seems to be more on longevity and past performance than anything else.  The team is probably better off cutting their losses and moving on.

in July when the Jays are 49-54.

Doe-eyed optimist!

i think if there's any truth to that Wells move you have to do it - even if Wells bounces back to 270/25 -290/30 he's not doing enough to help the team win, and his contract is too burdensome.
Frankly i think the Wells and Zito rumours to be the least likely. Has the sale of the cubs been finalized yet? i forget... it obviously makes a huge difference. Money wise it's taking on a huge commitment, 5 times the amount of Bradley. realistically you're better off just waving the guy than taking one of those 2 in trade, unless you're convinced that would put you over the edge.I don't think a Fokudome Wells Soriano outfield would be too great defensively. I guess there's power upside? Haffner is a no go (world's most expensive pinch hitter?) Rowand makes the most sense, followed by Pierre (I guess if you can keep him as a 4th outfielder.) Burrell if you can stomach him and Soriano in the corners and think his bat will come back in the NL would be worth more than Pierre (and paying the difference in salaries.

I guess 4 years at 64 million is ok for the Cubs but why not just cut him and look for a free agent? you could get similar production for way less money. I guess Jim Hendry isn't the best GM. i just don't see this happening.

IF the Wells "deal" goes through it means the Jays will be paying about 15 million a year for the last three years with no Wells and no Bradley. Will Wells be worth 7 million a year over each of those last three years? 'Cause if he is - then DON'T make this deal.

However, is a 35 year old CFer who weighs over 225 pounds that big an asset?

Wells 225 at 35?... maybe if he does that p90x.

But it would be interesting to observe the negotiations for how much salary each team is to be responsible for for the last years of the contract.

Err..

I meant to say:

He'll certainly be a big asset, but I doubt he'll be a particular valuable one.

Good point Richard about how under Arnsberg we seemed to have a plague hitting our pitchers. Checking a google cache of the Jays page on him he was hired in 2004 and coached in AAA for a year before taking over the ML duties in 2005.

The runs allowed with Arnsberg as pitching coach ranged from 610 (2008) to 771 (2009). The 3 years before he came it was over 800 each season, 753 in 2001, and over 900 in 2000.

What about the injuries? One easy way is to check pitcher turnover. During Arnsberg's years we had between 18 and 24 pitchers up each year, twice under 20, 3 times over. For the 10 seasons previous we had 20 pitchers throw every year peaking at 25 in 2004. 1994 and earlier saw just one season hit 20 (1991) with a low of 13 in 1984.

Will Wells be worth 7 million a year over each of those last three years? 'Cause if he is - then DON'T make this deal.

He's not worth anywhere near $7 million today, why would he turn it around when he's a few years older?  Said another way, if he were a free agent today would you spend $40 million on him?  Of course not.  If the Cubs will pay that more power to them.

While I must admit that when my mind turns to drink my eyes glance to Scotland and their many fine single malts - however, single malt is my only close to connection to Scotland. While I don't waste money I'm not immune to the occasional lottery ticket, good bottle of scotch or an occasional dirty weekend in a good(ish) hotel (with the love of my life - just don't tell my wife! {Joke}) I have to admit it burns me that we might be paying 15 MILLION a year for three or so years for Wells after he and Mr Bradley have long since left our stage.

I am not a poor man - but 15 large - very freakin' large, is just more money than my single malt lovin' frugal heart can bear to be seen spent - JUST for NOT HAVING Wells. The problem is KEEPING Mr Wells for the next half decade and a bit just doesn't pass the taste test either. AA - do the deal.

I'm not sure why people are so high on the Bradley for Wells swap. The article talked about splitting the $86 million difference between the Wells-Bradley contracts. The $43 million for nothing. Isn't this the sort of thing people got pissed at JP for - paying players to play for other teams?

Wells wasn't that bad (at the dish and aside from time lost to injury) in 2008 and I don't think there's any reason to think he can't rebound to that level. Move him to a corner, bat him down in the order and he may well surprise with a rebound in power production. Not that I personally like the idea, but I'm never fond of the of wasting $43 to gain a mere $43 in payroll flexibility. If it were Cubs taking on 2/3 or/ 3/4 of the $86 million dollar difference, but at one-half and for Bradley that doesn't seem like an out and out win for the Jays. Heck I write this as a someone who likes Bradley as a player and feels his 2009 season wasn't as nearly as bad as some Cubs fans scream about it being.

If the Jays paid the difference in the 2010 & 2011 salaries between Bradley and Wells AND ate around $30 million for 2012-2014 (the Jays would eat around $53 million this way), I would LOVE this trade. Elliot suggests the Jays may only have to pick up around $43 million...frankly, I don't know why the Cubs would do this trade even if the Jays ate $63 million...perhaps Hendry is under the assumption that Wells is still a competent CF.

I haven't been on this website for a while...perhaps this has already been suggested...but in the mold of the Rios/Lincecum trade, how about Lind for Bumgarner? To me, this is the time to sell high on Lind. I'm sure a lot of teams would love him, but with Snider in LF and Wells in the other corner (eventually...hopefully) Lind is either going to be a (likely below average) 1B or a DH. But an offence as limp as the Giants could use a young cornerstone like him and the Jays can just sign some random guy to a one year deal to DH. And if the Rockies want a young pitcher, give them Romero if they'll give up CarGo. I'll take Bumgarner and Cargo over Lind and Romero (though this is likely the reason these trades will never happen). I'm hoping AA will have the balls to make some trades and not just rely on a weak farm system and free agency.

I am sad to see Arnie go. A lot of pitchers who probably had little business being in the majors (or at least playing prominent roles in the majors) did well before their eventual arm surgeries...

Lind wasn't a below average DH this year. I don't see why he'd be in the future. As for Lind for Bumgarner, it has been said before but TINSTAAPP. 4 ML games don't change that a Lind for him could be disastrous. Lind for Cain, perhaps, but I don't see any reason why Lind's OPS+ will crater next season.

Romero for CarGo is probably a no go.

The trade route could kill the Blue Jays as it has been mentioned on this site, no teams are looking to make trades unless one team can completely fleece the other (see the Cliff Lee and Santana trades).

> Not that I personally like the idea, but I'm never fond of the of wasting $43 to gain a mere $43 in payroll flexibility.

It depends how much money is in the Blue Jays budget. If you have bottomless pits of money you might as well keep Wells. I imagine he'll be an ok right fielder for a few years yet. However, the budget is going to be limited. 2009 salaries were $72million:

http://espn.go.com/mlb/teams/salaries?team=tor

Vernon Wells salary for the next 5 years are $12.5million + about $8million of signing bonus, , $23m, $21m, $21m, $21m. (http://edition.cnn.com/2006/SPORT/12/19/baseball.wells/). is he is going to be anywhere near that valuable? The answer is no. The real question is: "After paying Wells salary, is there going to room in the budget to improve the Blue Jays." I would say, that unless the Jays up their budget , the answer is also no. And that's for the next five years. I think it is slowly dawning on people how catastrophic Vernon Wells' contract is. To avoid a further 5 years of mediocrity you have to swallow his salary somehow. That means either upping your budget or seeing if you can dump some of his salary. While I take what Bob Elliot says with a grain of salt, if the Cubs are offering to take Wells off your hands you do it before they put down the phone. Even if you then trade Bradley for a box of Timbits, you are away laughing.

Lind wasn't a below average DH this year. I don't see why he'd be in the future. As for Lind for Bumgarner, it has been said before but TINSTAAPP. 4 ML games don't change that a Lind for him could be disastrous. Lind for Cain, perhaps, but I don't see any reason why Lind's OPS+ will crater next season.

It has nothing to do with Lind declining in the future. I just don't see the value in having a DH like him when DH/LF/1B who are slightly inferior are readily available. And getting potential aces who are pretty much ML ready is very difficult to do. In hindsight, Rios for Lincecum would have been a massive steal and the same caveats apply (though Lincecum was a little more proven and I guess he might have been considered a slightly better prospect than Bumgarner). Maybe Lind for Tommy Hanson is a little more up your alley (though I'd be shocked if the Braves did this).

There was a little bit of talk at one point that the Reds were interested in Rios at one point. Rios for Bailey, for example, would have been a poor deal (independent of the Rios extension at least), though Bailey could still improve. It's a risk, obviously...I just think that Lind's contributions are overrated when it is the easiest thing to acquire on the free agent market.

And while we're at it, lets try EE at 1B. His bat looked good in September/October; if he can be a competent 1B (and throwing seems to be his biggest issue), that Rolen trade looks even better.

I just don't see the value in having a DH like him when DH/LF/1B who are slightly inferior are readily available.

So readily available that we've seen Brad Wilkerson, Kevin Mench, Kevin Millar, and David Dellucci receive close to 700 PA over the last 2 seasons.

I just don't see the value in having a DH like him when DH/LF/1B who are slightly inferior are readily available.

So readily available that we've seen Brad Wilkerson, Kevin Mench, Kevin Millar, and David Dellucci receive close to 700 PA over the last 2 seasons.

If you don't like the idea of trading a DH who has had one good year for a high ceiling pitching prospect, that's fine. But that is completely independent from the fact that there will be a number of DH/LF types available this offseason much like there were last offseason. Adam Dunn gets 2/20 on the open market and his bat is as good as Lind's and he's been doing it for years...but Tim Lincecum on the open market is probably an 8 year $200 million investment and that is a conservative guess. How much worse of a prospect is Bumgarner now compared to Lincecum a couple of years ago? Less proven, sure...but let's not act like it would take a whole lot to get Hideki Matsui this offseason...yes he is worse than Lind...but he is not monumentally worse while a potential ace in the rotation, to me, is worth giving up Lind...

It's a risk, obviously...I just think that Lind's contributions are overrated when it is the easiest thing to acquire on the free agent market.

If this is true, and for the sake of your point lets say it is, then why on earth would any team trade a top prospect for something they can simply go out on the market and sign?

EE at 1B is not the dumbest idea I've ever heard, not by a long shot. But this organization is so weak at 3B that unless something else comes in during the offseason, it isn't an option.

As for Gaston...

Sorry, I don't see this as a positive. To me, it looks like the organization has misused/ thrown away 2 strengths (Buterfield, and the way Arnsberg has been left in the dark about pitching decisions I'd leave too, in his place) and is now wasting a season. Not just failing to contend - wasting a season, which is unforgivable. Another year of the boneheaded moves and guys like Millar hitting 4th will do some damage to this organization's potential development. And there's no reason for the organization to allow that if it's serious about building a winner. Or serious about having the best people, top to bottom.

What a terrible, contradictory signal this is, vs. the rhetoric AA has been pushing lately.

Cito did not give this team its best chance to win every night. Quite the reverse. And this team needs all the help it can get. It needs young players playing, vets shoved aside, an atmosphere that says winning is important, and forward momentum on the field from the year-start baseline.

I don't see good odds of getting those things in 2010. The first rule of holes is... when you're in one, stop digging. To me, the Jays management is still digging.

So much gloom...so much doom... it's enough to drive a guy to drink already.

I say we've a 50 / 50 chance that next year we'll have a rotation of a healthy and ready to rumble Roy, Marcum, Romero, McGowan and Rzepski - that will be one of the best starting fives in the league. We'll have an above average bullpen chosen from about a dozen or so good pitchers - remember Tallet and Richmond can now be available for the pen where they are both great assets. Offensively - I'd BET my new Tilley winter hat that a heart of the order of: Hill (R), Lind (L), Ruiz (R), Snider (L), Encarnacion (R) and Overbay (L), Wells (R) will SURPRISE the AL East - and MOST of the readers of DaBox.

2010 is not a write off - even if you THINK YOU KNOW Cito sucks. Beeston says we can be, "Boston." I agree - in fact I think we can be the new Boston starting in 2010 - Wildcard here we come.

ps: Did I mention how much I HATE the freakin' Yanks? Go Phillies!

Everyone knows I don't like keeping Cito BUT I'm not bothered at all by moving Butter back to 3B. He did a very good job there and - frankly - he'll need more time to work with EE and, potentially, the new SS

I don't have an issue with tweaking the chemistry by having a bench coach Cito might actually listen to either.

I, for one, am a fan of the idea of Butterfield getting a shot to be the next manager IF he has that ambition, but I don't see this as a demotion or anything to complain about.

I've hear a LOT of good things about Walton too so, as much as i tremble at the idea of losing Arny, i'm anxious to see if Walton lives up to the praise.


touching on the EE to first idea - I've mentioned that a couple of times myself. If we could sell the Mariners or the Mets or the O's on Overbay, and find the right match at 3B, you might come out ahead on money and production.

Why not just keep Overbay for 2010 and let EE get the majority of his ABs vs. LHP at 1B (and lots of starts out of the DH spot too, depending on who you else you sign)? He's a career .270/.374/.466 vs. LHP, but doesn't hit RHP well enough (.256/.328/.442) to be a starting 1B. The Jays could sign a guy like Beltre, an OF/DH, and an upside SP (Myers, Harden, Bedard, Escobar, Pavano...) and probably still be under 100m, even with Overbay.

I rarely disagree with you MyLegacy, but I'd estimate the chances of Halladay, McGowan and Marcum healthy and in the rotation for the year at closer to 2%, certainly not 50/50.  I'll be surprised if Doc isn't traded.  McGowan's had Tommy John surgery, rotator cuff surgery, knee surgery, and he has a frayed labrum that they decided to leave alone.  He may never return.  Marcum will be back, but to expect anywhere near 200 innings is a pipe dream.  This isn't doom and gloom.  Rather, I'd actually be annoyed if the Jays kept what they had and paraded another .500 team (in the AL East, above average in the league) out yet again.  I WANT to see Halladay traded, even though he's my favourite player ever, because I can't realistically see this team reaching the playoffs with the core it has, and I want to see Doc win it all.  It's time to re-tool by trading away established players for prospects, dump salary and spend money on the draft, and make another run at it on or about 2015 with the new prospects they've obtained.  I won't spend another penny on this team as long as they cheap out in the draft and continue to field a below .500 team, but I'd support a rebuild if the team had a plan and wasn't just dumping salary.

WRT the coaching moves, I pretty much agree with everything MG said in his post.

I was hoping to see Pat Hentgen get a position with the club.

 

It's a risk, obviously...I just think that Lind's contributions are overrated when it is the easiest thing to acquire on the free agent market.

If this is true, and for the sake of your point lets say it is, then why on earth would any team trade a top prospect for something they can simply go out on the market and sign?

For starters, if a team like the Giants wanted Lind it would be to play LF (obviously not to DH). We already have Snider to play LF and the only way to make Lind/Snider work in the OF would be to go with the objectionable Lind/Wells/Snider combo which is about as ugly as it comes defensively. But a team like the Giants would presumably be okay with a below average defensive LF...I mean, they are linked to Jason Bay to some degree and he has a somewhat similar skillset to Lind (excellent offense, suspect defense) from the right side.

The other option would be to move Lind to 1B which I am in favour of if we do, in fact, keep Lind. Realistically, Lind isn't going anywhere...just a random thought of something I would consider.

As for EE, even if he isn't moved to 1B on a full-time basis, why not get him some reps there and see if he can be a Shea Hillenbrand 1B/3B/DH-type player? The less time he spends at 3B, the more value he has, in my opinion.

Another random trade proposal (I realize that due to the NTC's involved, this is virutally impossible):

Vernon Wells and Roy Halladay for Carlos Zambrano and Milton Bradley

Now, Elliot said that the Cubs/Jays were talking about splitting the difference (i.e. the Blue Jays toss in $43 million) between Wells/Bradley. Well, Zambrano has a lot more money left (about $38 million guaranteed) on his contract than Halladay including a 2013 vesting option (though it is unlikely to vest).

Talent-wise, the Cubs are getting more and they are also ridding themselves of two headaches as well as getting a true franchise player in Halladay. From the Jays perspective, I look at it this way: would the Jays trade Halladay for nothing if it meant getting rid of VW? I think they would (and, quite frankly, I hope they would). Well, Bradley has $21 million left on his contract and I'm guessing they'd only have to eat between $5-10 million to move him. Zambrano, as much as he is a headache, has positive trade value (at least I have to believe he has positive trade value). He is only 28 and I'm thinking a team like the Mets, for example, would give up something to take him and his contract.

Not that this will ever happen...I think Wells and Halladay would certainly waive their NTC's, but I don't know why Zambrano would come to TO. Perhaps a 3rd team (i.e. the Mets) could come in and take on Zambrano and give us some prospects...

Cole Hamels after last night: "I can't wait for it to end. It's been mentally draining. You can't wait for a fresh start."

Uh, the series is only 2-1...

I have to imagine the Phillies are frustrated with him. If his stock is as low as the media seems to make it, I wonder what it would take to bring him over here.

And that quote is from here: http://zozone.mlblogs.com/archives/2009/11/the_collapse_of_cole_hamels.html

I was hoping to see Pat Hentgen get a position with the club.

According to my Media Guide, Pat Hentgen is a special assistant to the team president.

People are complaining about Brian Butterfield's demotion.   1) Cito wasn't interested in him, a trait found in people 60+ years old.   (Never give out personal information).   2) Butter's primary focus and greatest gift is Fielding / Defense and Third Base Coach was his primary and most efficient position.

Stop complaining about Cito, he can always be relieved as manager and start his consulting role early.   He should listen to Nick Leyva (former Manager) as Nick also had trouble getting another Managing job again, just like Cito.

I'd rather take Zito for Wells and ship the difference in cash if we don't keep Wells.   Strange thing that, first year with a trainer is his worst year.   Wells will, on a continuous basis, hit .275 or more, 30 2Bs or more, 20 HR or more, 80 RBI or more, 15 SB or more, etc. (This type of production is worth $12 M - $15 M.);plus above average (not very good or great) defense with a strong arm (Worth $3 M. - $5 M. more).   And everyone wants to trade him and replace him with ?????????????????

Why does so many foolish people want to trade Adam Lind, whose birthday is midish July.   In 2010, age 26-27, not eligible for arbitration.   In 2011, age 27-28, first year of eligibility for arbitration.   In 2012, age 28-29, second year of arbitration.   In 2013, age 29-30, final year of arbitration.   This is his prime.   He should continuously hit for .280 or more, 30 2Bs or more, 25 HR or more, 90 RBI or more, (This type of production is worth $14 M. - $18 M.); with only average defense (Unchanged).

If there is a scale on which Wells is an above average defensive player and Lind is an average defensive player, I hope that my employer adopts it for when they rate me.

If there is a scale on which Wells is an above average defensive player and Lind is an average defensive player, I hope that my employer adopts it for when they rate me.

They both suck (espescially Wells) at their current positions...but perhaps VW could be an average defensive corner OF and Lind could be an average defensive 1B...a lot of 'ifs', I know...but what else is there to hope for with Wells and Lind defensively at this point...

Everybody is above average.

I’m a person that generally believes most managers only have a small impact on the field. But with that said, I don’t ever want a manager that bats a washed up Kevin Millar in the 4 spot or doesn’t understand how a double switch works in a NL park.

The rest of the coaching moves don’t really excite or bother me. I know Arnsberg is pretty popular amongst the fanbase but a staggering amount of serious injuries to starting pitchers happened under his watch. We will never have a proper way of evaluating pitcher coaches. Before Leo Mazzone was hired by the O’s. he was viewed as the best in the business. O’s pitching was awful before he came on board, and it was still awful with him there.

Interesting note in Griffin's latest Jays-related article. He notes that Arnsberg was one of Halladay's best friends and that the move to let Arnsberg go to Houston was likely connected to a decision that has been made to trade Halladay.... thoughts?

DH, i don't know how that would happen. I remember reading that drayton had money issues, and even trading oswalt might happen. they dont' really have anything i care too much about.
i guess if they wanted to get rid of everything they have for one last chance while halladay was under contract sure. it doesn't seem very plausible

Sorry Lex, I didn't mean he'd go to the Astros so much so as Griffin is inferring that Halladay will go somewhere. Which, if the relationship between Arnsberg and Roy was as close as Griffin would like us to believe, would make sense. You don't open the door for an asset like that if you're looking to keep Roy around.... or maybe you do but...

Admittedly, I'm just hopeful that Tampa Bay finds a way to fit Roy's salary into their plans. They are one of the few teams with a surplus of assets that fill our holes - SS Brignac, SP Davis/Hellickson/Downs, CF Jennings...

I thought coaches where on one-year deals. Wasn't Arnsberg free to go wherever he wanted?

With no appropriate thread to place this and with only a tenuous connection to the topic of coaches (he was coached, after all), Aaron Hill gets loving in the world of plus/minus.

Hill had a negative UZR, including a negative double play number, this year.  I was skeptical of the UZR number in this case, and I see that I was not alone. 

UZR has Hill as negative on the double play pivot for his career.  That is something that I disagree with very strongly subjectively.  Hill's pivot is obviously not as good as Mazeroski's, but as good as anyone's right now.  I am not sure how the UZR calculation for DPs works, but Hill's career number is very far out of sync with everything I have seen (and apparently what the people at the Fielding Bible have seen). 

I thought coaches where on one-year deals. Wasn't Arnsberg free to go wherever he wanted?

IIRC, the coaching staff signed two-year contract extensions after the 2008 season.  I forget how contracts for coaches were handled during the Gillick and Ash eras, but multi-year deals for coaches were the norm during Ricciardi's tenure.

If a coach is in demand, by another team(s), permission is normally given, if the move is a promotion (or appears as one), to talk to the coach.   If the move is lateral, or of lesser value, the premission is usually denied.   There can be exceptions.   The Houston Astros' position should be, at this time, considered a promotion for Brad Arnsburg.   (Unless I was misinformed, his replacement has been or is of interest by other team(s).   Bruce Walton is reported to be very good at his job.) 

Everything being done, during this time, in Step One, is establish the long term survival of this team as a viable entity in the Marketplace.   Prosperity and competitiveness will follow.   This is a business, and the business, is entertainment.

"This is a business, and the business, is entertainment."

I wish those designing the experience at the dome thought more along these lines. There is no reason why the vendors outside should be offering a better dog outside than those in (or never mind for a non-meat eater like myself, veggie dogs).

Can the flashback fridays, kids saturdays and bring something more substantial into the dome experience (A bluejays HoF on the 100 level? More autograph sessions, post-game or on non-travel off-days?)

There are baseball fans in Toronto and if Bob McCown is to be believed the TV numbers we going up with the Jays hot start (if not gate attendance) which is the first hurdle that needs to be met before the gate comes back, entertainment or not.

Veggie dogs would be appreciated - I prefer them to the meat ones although I do eat meat still.  We also need far better use of photos and even a video wall somewhere would be good.  Photos with the players history on the wall is always a good idea to bring you up to speed with the past. 

Although to me the #1 thing would be to fix those (#& ticket windows so you can actually understand the person behind them.  Scalpers provide better information than the ticket booth people on where your seats are and options that might work for you and your family.   As a parent I like the idea of 'Junior Jays' days and I loved flashback Fridays just due to the interviews on the radio with players long gone from the Toronto scene.  Having stable every week things is a good idea.

Veggie dogs would be appreciated - I prefer them to the meat ones although I do eat meat still.

Far be it from me to question another man's taste, in anything, let alone hot dogs, but ... huminahuminahumina — WHA?

Maybe you have discovered the king of veggie dog brands, one that doesn't taste like chemically flavored tofu. If so, please, please enlighten me. My daughter, who won't eat any meat that isn't organic, and who has been a reluctant veggie dog eater for years, will thank you. And I will thank you, because it means I won't have to boil the floppy flesh coloured things I'm forced to feed her now.

"Organic" hot dogs (in the sense of no antibiotics or hormones used) are available at a number of retailers in Toronto and Kitchener.  I believe that you can also get grass-fed if you look carefully.  As for "vegetarian hot dogs", that's a whole 'nother story.  Beef is beef and tofu is tofu.