Batter's Box Interactive Magazine - "Since the Jays have no hope of contending this year ..."

"Since the Jays have no hope of contending this year ..."

The headline above this story is a direct quote from a recent post in another thread by a long-time and well-spoken Bauxite. But its source is hardly the matter -- I could have found 50 or 60 similar sentiments and throwaway phrases posted to Batter's Box by dozens of different people in recent weeks.

"The Jays have no hope of contending this year."

Really? I don't write that to be sarcastic or ironic -- the thought just raises a whole series of pertinent questions, especially here on what is generally a pro-Jays fan site, and I'd genuinely like to hear your answers to each and every one. Like these ...

Do you honestly believe that there is "no hope," and if so, how -- if at all -- does this affect your status as a game-going or (for those more distant) boxscore-following fan?
If the team jumps off to a genuinely promising and surprising start -- say, something like 20-11 after five weeks -- do your expectations change? (Note, I said "expectations," not "hopes.")
How does your reaction differ, if at all, from right now if that same five-week start is, say, something like 7-24?
If you are (presumably) a Jays fan and do buy the "Jays have no hope of contending this year" premise, is there another team for whom you are rooting? (Not "rooting against," so no "Anybody but the Red Sox" type answers here, please.)
If you believe, like many have indicated, that 2010 is a necessary "rebuilding" year, then in some odd way, wouldn't you hope the Jays don't have a surprisingly decent 84-78 (or even 80-82) type of year, as this could be a long-term setback?
If the Jays CAN contend -- and I haven't heard or read anybody who's really taken up that case -- what needs to happen for that to occur?

You see where the line of questioning is going ... ask your own versions or followups. Answer any or all (or none) of these. I am just genuinely curious about the mindset of a fanbase with apparently solidly-LOW expectations.

Posted by Mick Doherty on Tuesday, February 16 2010 @ 10:50 PM EST.

"Since the Jays have no hope of contending this year ..." | 82 comments | Create New Account

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

robertdudek - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 02:17 AM EST (#211873) #

Do you honestly believe that there is "no hope," and if so, how -- if at all -- does this affect your status as a game-going or (for those more distant) boxscore-following fan?

Standard rebuilding year - the first genuine "no hope" year since Ricciardi's second year at the helm. Enjoy the baseball - watch the kids develop, it's all good.

If the team jumps off to a genuinely promising and surprising start -- say, something like 20-11 after five weeks -- do your expectations change? (Note, I said "expectations," not "hopes.")

Same as last year - it can't be sustained - the offense just isn't there and there aren't going to be any additions to it this season. Catching and SS are, once again, black holes.

How does your reaction differ, if at all, from right now if that same five-week start is, say, something like 7-24?

It might indicate to me that there is less good young talent than we thought, but I would not be overly pessimistic even if the Jays end up losing 110 games. After all, the Tigers built quite swiftly from their debacle year.

If you are (presumably) a Jays fan and do buy the "Jays have no hope of contending this year" premise, is there another team for whom you are rooting? (Not "rooting against," so no "Anybody but the Red Sox" type answers here, please.)

I've admired the Angels play for many years and I think Scioscia is the best regular season manager in baseball. Without Lackey and Figgins, he will be sorely tested this year.

If you believe, like many have indicated, that 2010 is a necessary "rebuilding" year, then in some odd way, wouldn't you hope the Jays don't have a surprisingly decent 84-78 (or even 80-82) type of year, as this could be a long-term setback?

I don't think management will be fooled by such an unexpectedly good year to think they are closer than they are. I think they are looking at 2012 or 2013 as the earliest emergence of a serious team and I doubt anything that happens this season will cause them to think otherwise.

If the Jays CAN contend -- and I haven't heard or read anybody who's really taken up that case -- what needs to happen for that to occur?

The entire rotation has to stay healthy and 3 of them have to greatly exceed expectations. Hill and Lind have to defy expectations and repeat their performance instead of reverting to the mean. Wells must be healthy and productive all year. Snider has to become a monster. Arencibia has to figure things out, arrive in May and set the league on fire. They have to trade for an adequate shortstop. Bullpen has to maintain their solid performance. They have to win an inordinate number of close games. The Sox and Yankees have to come up with key injuries - at least two key members of each of their rotations have to go down and at least one of their three best hitters has to miss significant time. It would also help if the Rays get off to a poor start and bail on the race by trading Crawford.

If all of these things happen, the Jays will be in a dogfight for a playoff spot. Odds? Maybe 1 in 800.

christaylor - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 02:21 AM EST (#211874) #

I just wrote in the other thread that I'd stay out of this thread, I changed my mind.

1) To not have hope, before a single game is played, is silly. I don't usually agree with cliches but the one that goes "they don't play the games on paper" has stood the test of time for a reason.

2) 20-11 is not that surprising but 40-22 -- that'd be something. The probability of at a true .500 team going 20-11 are not that remote, especially if the strength of schedule is weak.

3) See above. At 14-48 it is time to shift gears (I'm also not dirt poor but I'd lay $100 right now that the Jays will not be 14-48).

4) I don't think the Jays will come close to a playoff spot in
2010. I secretly (whoops the cat is out of the bag) cheer/follow the Yankees each year as much as the Jays and have since the the mid-1990s.

5) I don't understand anyone who buys into the a decent year is a long term set back. What did 2004 net the team? The draft is largely luck and convincing talent to sign for what the team wants. There's no other benefit to sucking at the ML level.

6) I can't imagine the Jays contending but if this team is anything like the good stories I've heard/read about watching the 1983/84 Jays, that's fine with me. I've already bought a 10 game ticket package in anticipation of this scenario.

christaylor - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 02:24 AM EST (#211875) #

"Odds? Maybe 1 in 800."

I'll take that bet -- I'll give you a $1 if the Jays aren't in a dogfight for a play off spot and you give me $800 if they are...

Alex Obal - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 05:18 AM EST (#211877) #

1. Yes. We are hopeless. No, it doesn't affect my following the team. I probably care a bit less about the opposition because the wins and losses don't matter as much.
2. I think some scenarios could sway me (Snider and Wells with 1.100 OPS and Encarnacion an above-average fielder too much to ask?), but there really are a lot of holes in this team. Last year I fell into the trap of overrating the offense after the hot start against weak competition. This year's schedule is not terrifying early on.
3. In the case of a 7-24 start, I'd be happy that it allows the team to wave a white flag without looking too cheap, but concerned about the Montreal Expos Death Spiral.
4. Rangers, because they're overrated as all hell, all their games are slugfests, their franchise is historically irrelevant, and their pitching prospects are fascinating. There is compelling empirical evidence that it's impossible to develop pitchers in Arlington, but Feliz and Holland look like absolute sure shots. I find this interesting. Also, Phillies, obviously, but everyone's gonna say that.
5. As long as the front office assesses what it has at the end of the year realistically, I'd actually prefer the 84-win season.
6. How the Jays contend: Jays finish top 2 in DER led by gold glover Edwin Encarnacion. Brett Cecil and Travis Snider make the leap. Hill, Lind and Rzepczynski deliver encores. Wells hits or is benched, aggressive trade at the deadline, Kevin Gregg's leverage index is below 0.6, and the Jays outperform their pythag. (Is that too much to ask?)

scottt - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 07:01 AM EST (#211878) #

I'm not going to speculate on my ability to pry myself away from baseball. Maybe seeing Mauer in pinstripes could achieve that.

The team ERA will likely dictate how watchable the games are.

I'm rooting for the Phillies and the Mariners.

Dave Till - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 07:29 AM EST (#211879) #

Obviously, I'm going to have to be more careful about what I say around here if I'm gonna get quoted and all. :-)

Do you honestly believe that there is "no hope," and if so, how -- if at all -- does this affect your status as a game-going or (for those more distant) boxscore-following fan?

True confession: I haven't been watching many games in person the last few years. But that has nothing to do with the team's performance on the field. That's not likely to change this year.

If the team jumps off to a genuinely promising and surprising start -- say, something like 20-11 after five weeks -- do your expectations change? (Note, I said "expectations," not "hopes.")

Nope. Especially not after last year.

How does your reaction differ, if at all, from right now if that same five-week start is, say, something like 7-24?

A 7-24 start would be very depressing, and would cost the team a lot of money, as casual fans would stay home all summer. See below for more.

If you are (presumably) a Jays fan and do buy the "Jays have no hope of contending this year" premise, is there another team for whom you are rooting? (Not "rooting against," so no "Anybody but the Red Sox" type answers here, please.)

I have no second choice. I don't even watch many baseball games that don't have the Jays in them. I would have rooted for the Expos, but their owners thoroughly rogered the city of Montreal and then skulked out of town like thieves in the night.

If you believe, like many have indicated, that 2010 is a necessary "rebuilding" year, then in some odd way, wouldn't you hope the Jays don't have a surprisingly decent 84-78 (or even 80-82) type of year, as this could be a long-term setback?

No no no. The more wins, the better. Wins are fun. And a surprisingly decent season would mean improved attendance.

If the Jays are really awful this year, they won't draw well, and Rogers will lose buckets of money. And it's not entirely clear that the post-Ted ownership would be willing to sink that much money into a losing cause. The temptation would be there to bail out - and then, yes, there would be a real risk of an Expos Death Spiral.

If the Jays CAN contend -- and I haven't heard or read anybody who's really taken up that case -- what needs to happen for that to occur?

For one thing, the starting pitching would have to miraculously come together. At present, the Jays don't have even one starting pitcher that can be counted on to deliver 200+ innings of above-average performance. (Where have you gone, Roy Halladay? A nation turns its lonely eyes to you.) And the Jays are below average at catcher, shortstop, third base, one of the corner outfield slots, half the time at first base, and maybe centre field (I'm not going to get into that argument today, thanks). That's just too many things that have to break right. It's not as bad as 1 in 800, but I'd put them as a 1 in 100 shot. I'm just hoping for fewer than 100 losses.

At least there is some semblance of hope, though. Last summer, I was thoroughly convinced that this team was likely to be doomed for quite some time. They were losing two games in three, and there was no help in sight from the farm system. Now, at least, there are some actual prospects, and the Jays have a lot of draft picks and a whole bunch of smart people trying to figure out what to do with them. If they can draft well this year, sign all the players they drafted, and get at least some of the breaks that were so thoroughly denied to J.P., they might be on track by about 2012.

Denoit - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 07:29 AM EST (#211880) #

If the Jays CAN contend -- and I haven't heard or read anybody who's really taken up that case -- what needs to happen for that to occur?

Not that I think they will contend or this will happen but. Here are some things that would have to happen

1. Snider breaks out and puts up numbers similar to AAA last year.

2. Pitchers all preform at or above expecatations. Ex. Marcum comes back a little better than when he left. Romero progresses significantly. Morrow has a breakout campaign. Rzepcyznski progresses significantly. And another young arm steps up. (Someone in the bullpen will also have to step up and be a legitimate closer)

3. Vernon Wells plays like its 2006.

4. Lyle Overbay plays like its 2006

5. Encarnacion plays like its September 2009

6. Jose Bautista somehow has a batting average over .270

7. If all the things above happen, and the all these guys stay healthy inluding Lind and Hill then ya maybe they could contend.

AWeb - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 07:56 AM EST (#211881) #

1. Not no hope exactly, but I'll be watching early, and if the the team is at least bearable to watch, I'll keep watching.
2. My expectations won't change much all year - I expect the Jays to lose more than they win, regardless of current record.
3. If it's an ugly 7-24, I'll tune out of the season earlier than usual, and come back later during a good stretch.
4. NL: Rockies, AL: whatever surprise teams are contending (there's almost always a bad team playing over their heads in July), and strangely, I like almost all the teams out West except the Angels. I've had enough Angels.
5. I don't expect the Jays to contend for the top pick or anything, but yes, a surprisingly good finish would be a setback for the long-term. But I'm not rooting for losses.
6. Every year, a team plays 7-10 games over their "expected" record. If the Jays get repeat performances from those who were good last year (Lind, Hill, Romero, Frasor, Downs, Overbay a recovery to ~800 OPS and merely below average defense (rather than league worst defense) from Wells, Snider posts a 110 OPS+ with average defense (quite plausible), and are actually the team on the happy side of pythagoras, I could see them winning 90 games. I'm not sure how the pitching is going to work out - more so than the hitters, the pitchers will have to have a long series of career years. Given that most have barely had careers at this point, that could happen and the Jays could still stink of course. But a 81-81 expected record and a 27-14 record in one-run games could happen.

Matthew E - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 09:17 AM EST (#211882) #

Do you honestly believe that there is "no hope," and if so, how -- if at all -- does this affect your status as a game-going or (for those more distant) boxscore-following fan?

I believe that there is no hope, that under current conditions there will never be any hope, and that there's no particular reason why the current conditions would ever change. (They might, of course, but there's nothing pushing them to change.)

It doesn't affect my status as a fan at all. Just because the Blue Jays will probably never be really good again is no reason why they can't win in any given afternoon. I'm a Blue Jays fan. That's what I am. They could win zero games over the next ten years and I'd still be a fan. Stupid, maybe, but there it is.

I don't think that an Expos Death Spiral is a possibility. Name an empty North American baseball market that might be better at its best than Toronto is at its worst.

If the team jumps off to a genuinely promising and surprising start -- say, something like 20-11 after five weeks -- do your expectations change? (Note, I said "expectations," not "hopes.")

Not anymore.

How does your reaction differ, if at all, from right now if that same five-week start is, say, something like 7-24?

Obviously, 20-11 is more fun than 7-24, and will have me in a better mood.

If you are (presumably) a Jays fan and do buy the "Jays have no hope of contending this year" premise, is there another team for whom you are rooting? (Not "rooting against," so no "Anybody but the Red Sox" type answers here, please.)

No, not really.

If you believe, like many have indicated, that 2010 is a necessary "rebuilding" year, then in some odd way, wouldn't you hope the Jays don't have a surprisingly decent 84-78 (or even 80-82) type of year, as this could be a long-term setback?

I don't think it makes any difference at all, as I believe that whatever the Jays try isn't going to work in the long run.

If the Jays CAN contend -- and I haven't heard or read anybody who's really taken up that case -- what needs to happen for that to occur?

You mean this year? Uh... they need to find three starting pitchers who can't be beaten, or possibly four starting pitchers who are real good. The bullpen has to be better than it was last year (not that it was terrible last year). Big seasons from Wells, Overbay and Snider would help a lot. And, most important of all, the team would have to rise to the occasion instead of shrinking from it, something they haven't done all millennium long.

MatO - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 09:46 AM EST (#211883) #

The question that I'll be looking to answer in the next few seasons is whether the Jays can develop 3 solid starters out of all the pitching prospects they have. Teams simply don't have consistent 1-5 rotations. The Yanks had Chamberlain as their number 4 with an ERA of 4.75. They had a whole host of guys as their 5th. The Red Sox had 2 solid guys and a mishmash of starters for the other 3 spots.

Jdog - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 10:40 AM EST (#211884) #

1.the chance is slimmer than slim, but there is always a reason for hope.
2.Yes...and anyone who says differently is either a pessimist or liar. Not a fan.
3. I can then completely lose hope and focus on the young rookies and prospects and hope for continued losses piling up in order to guarantee a top 5 draft pick.
4. I will be cheering on the phillies and indians(lol)
5. Yes, either surprise and contend or finish as close to last as possible.
6. To contend Morrow has to become the ace of the rotation, with Marcum bouncing back to where he was prior to injury and Cecil and Rzep both figuring things out. McGowan shoring up the back of the bullpen would help. Hill and Lind have to maintain their progress. Snider needs to mash as he did in the minors. Wells and Encarnacion need to both end the season with close to 30 hrs. We need one of the Yanks and Sox to be decimated by injuries enough for us to sneak in and win that WC

dan gordon - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 11:02 AM EST (#211886) #

There's never ZERO hope, this is sports and "youneverknow". However, the chance that the Blue Jays will be contending for a post season spot in September is very, very small. I expect them to finish last.

I hope a couple more young guys develop into stars the way Hill and Lind did last year. That's the best chance for seeing a competitive team in future seasons - develop some high end talent. There are some guys with significant potential here, I really hope Marcum can make a big comeback from injury. Before he was hurt, he was putting up some really good numbers. We all know Snider has big upside. AA obviously thinks Morrow has the potential to be an ace. I'm somewhat skeptical on him because of control issues and the poor numbers he has away from his home park, but maybe AA is right about him. He's got to have a major improvement in his control. Hopefully, Romero continues to improve. Would be nice to see some of the hitters in the lower minors make some progress as well, plus the expected development of Drabek, Wallace, Cecil, Stewart, etc.

I see Rogers just increased their dividend today. Results beat expectations, although the stock is down a bit on competition fears. They are planning to continue their share buyback to the tune of $1.5 billion this year. Hopefully, the team will start to show signs of becoming a contender in a few years and they will kick a bigger chunk of that cash into the payroll. Keep buying those cell phones and get high-def cable TV!

Gerry - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 11:30 AM EST (#211887) #

I agree with Robert and several others that this year is all about development. If the Jays are to be better in 2011 and 2012 they need some of the young players to step up and establish themselves and particularly pitchers. As Robert said yesterday this team needs to find some #1 or #2 pitchers. There are lots of candidates and the development of pitchers is very unpredictable.

So this year I will watch or listen to most of the games, as usual, and I will be hoping for pitcher development, not so much wins and losses. I will also be watching Travis Snider and, when they get here, Brett Wallace, JP Arencibia and Brian Dopirak so see how much we can count on them. The post July 31st team might be more fun to watch than the pre-July team. I assume that the Jays will trade several experienced players in July leaving them with a team of kids to finish out the season. A lot of minor leaguers could lever a strong first half of the year into a second half major league audition.

There is not no hope, there is little hope of a playoff spot, but there is a lot of hope that the young guys play well. A fast or slow start won't change my opinion.

Other than the Jays I hope for some good races and some good underdogs making a run. It would be nice to see Tampa challenge the big two again.

If the Jays do come together and play better than expected I don't see that as a setback, I assume it will be because the young guys show they belong.

robertdudek - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 11:49 AM EST (#211888) #

I'll take that bet -- I'll give you a $1 if the Jays aren't in a dogfight for a play off spot and you give me $800 if they are...

It wasn't an offer for a bet. I don't make bets that have no upside for me. I was just thinking about the true odds of all those things happening.

Dewey - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 12:23 PM EST (#211891) #

Maybe it�s because I was weaned on the Chicago Cubs, but being a fan was never really about �being in contention� (whatever that *means* exactly). It was about going to the ballpark and enjoying a game. Good players. Good plays (even if seldom from the home team). Always something unanticipated. Fun. That can and will still happen, even at Rogers Centre. Why the preposterous rush to decide what the season will be like before Spring Training has even begun?! Let the season happen, for god�s sake. Relax. It simply doesn�t *matter* what you �predicted�, ever.

John Northey - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 01:48 PM EST (#211900) #

Lets see, how can the Jays contend...

If everyone does the best they've done we'd have (ERA+ or OPS+)...
Rotation...
Marcum: 125 (solid #2, weak ace)
Rzep: 118 (solid #2, very good #3)
Romero: 101 (solid #3/4 guy)
Richmond: 106 (nice #4/5 guy)
Dana Eveland: 95 (decent for #5 slot)
McGowan: 109 (nice mid-season pickup)
Litsch: 118 (very nice mid-season pickup)
Cecil: 82 (cannon fodder)
plus misc. kids

Well all know the pen could/should be solid to excellent (Downs/Accardo/Frasor all have closer potential, Carlson, Janssen, Camp are solid mid-game guys, plus new guy Gregg is a closer too).

Offense:
CA: Buck 103/Chavez 67 (not as ugly as I thought)
1B: Overbay 125
2B: Hill 117
3B: Encarnacion 108 (done it twice)
SS: Gonzo 99 (just 2 years ago)/McDonald 75
LF: Lind 144
CF: Wells 132
RF: Snider 98
DH: Ruiz 166

See? If EVERYONE has a career year we've got a heck of a team. Especially if McGowan and Litsch come back and Snider develops and...

Hey...get that straightjacket off me! C'mon guys!

christaylor - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 01:53 PM EST (#211902) #

Constructive statements? Sure.

Let's say the Jays are a true talent (hate that phrase) 73 win team. What would it take to get such a team to 89 wins (which seems to be low enough to mean the team was in a dog fight for the WC, or at least in it until September). There's a number floating around that the Jays are going to score approximately 706 runs (which seems off given they score nearly a 100 more than that last year). Let's take 706 runs as gospel.

The 2008 Jays gave up 610 (yes, no Roy Halladay, no AJ Burnett)... giving up 640 runs gets a 706 run team to about 89 wins. 640 allowed seems as improbable as scoring 706 -- but giving up 690 while scoring 750, that seems much more likely that being an 800-1 long-shot. That team wins about 87 games.

I'm not asking this to be a science forum, just a little justification for a number if you provide one. Of course it is subjective, of course it is random. Why imply that I've never watched baseball? A little back of the envelope calculation is all it takes for you to provide a justification and if you're wrong, as Dewey mentioned, it doesn't matter at all. Pitchers and catchers haven't even reported yet... jeez.

I'll leave it at that I am extremely certain that you are wrong that the odds are 800-1 that the Jays are in a dogfight this year. Let's agree to disagree because I see comments are being de-featured which isn't a good sign. My intention wasn't to start a flame war, deconstruct, but to try and make the implicit, explicit.

Richard S.S. - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 02:58 PM EST (#211904) #

Will they compete, is there no hope? Should it matter? I'm having fun now.

When Vernon Well's figures out who he wants to be, we'll see what kind of player he'll be. Jose Bautista is just passing through, if he's here next year. this team's in trouble. Travis Snider was rushed, but he's here now. If he's core, he'll break out this year. If he's not, this will be a long year. Whether or not you believe me, the road to contending starts here.

robertdudek - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 03:12 PM EST (#211905) #

The 2008 Jays gave up 610 (yes, no Roy Halladay, no AJ Burnett)... giving up 640 runs gets a 706 run team to about 89 wins. 640 allowed seems as improbable as scoring 706 -- but giving up 690 while scoring 750, that seems much more likely that being an 800-1 long-shot. That team wins about 87 games.

I think the Jays are roughly a true talent team of 67 wins, and the Red Sox and Yankees are both 93-97. The gap in talent is much greater than you suppose. It is not only the talent Toronto has lost since 2008, but that the other teams in the division have added talent. I include the Orioles, who have been rebuilding for years and might be on the brink of producing a .500 team. The Jays are at the very beginning of the process.

Let's face it, not only have we severly downgraded from Barajas and Scutaro, we have lost one of the best pitchers of his generation and any gains made by Snider or Wallace will be eaten up by the very likely reversion to the mean by Lind and/or Hill. This offense is absolutely terrible and even if we have the best ERA in the league (highly improbable), it likely won't mean more than 80 wins.

Because the division is so tough, conditions are not good for a miracle season. If the competition were mediocre (like in the AL West this year), I would give the Jays much better odds. Instead you have to hope that things go very wrong for two powerful teams.

Spifficus - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 03:20 PM EST (#211908) #

Aside from wondering if odds-making could possibly be considered purple prose, this thread has helped articulate what this year will be about for me.

Like a September without a pennant race, it'll be an emphasis on the parts rather than the whole. The progress of Romero's and Morrow's control will be more important than how many games back the Jays are at the break. Finding a long term SS, 3B and RF/LF are more important than whether we're in the basement. Watching the development of Snyder, Wallace, Arencibia (both of which I hope will arrive mid-season) and others will be better than watching if Gregg will close out a win against the Orioles to move into distant 4th. If more wins than expected come with all that, then great - it's more fun to watch a team win than lose. Sure, it may affect the draft position, but it could also make tradable assets more valuable, and there are tonnes of ways to add pieces.

That's not to say I don't have hope that the Jays can ride a wave of young, overachieving talent to a playoff spot, but it's not reasonable hope. When I look at the team, the talent level isn't there... yet. This year is about getting the talent into the organization. When I look ahead to next year, it appears at this point to be more of the same (hopefully with an emphasis on getting that talent to the majors). After that, hopefully the core talent will be deep enough and talented enough to allow contention.

As for other teams, it was fun to watch Giants, Marlins and Rangers games last year. Their announcing crews are really good, and made their unexpected runs immensely fun to watch. I'd definitely hope those three teams are again in the hunt for spots, and I'd be tempted to just bandwagon it a bit with whichever is doing the best.

Either way, it's going to be a fun season, because, well... it's baseball - it can't help it.

92-93 - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 04:28 PM EST (#211910) #

Let's face it, not only have we severly downgraded from Barajas

Dude, I don't know what kind of catcher evaluation system you are using, but it's terrible. First Suzuki, and now Barajas?

James W - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 05:52 PM EST (#211914) #

If the Jays do worse than Barajas's sub-.260 OBP this season, then there is absolutely no hope. For anything.

scottt - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 06:17 PM EST (#211915) #

Finding a long term SS, 3B and RF/LF are more important than whether we're in the basement.

And what's the odds of finding those? Encarnation could bounce back. Maybe. Wallace will play first, so no dice there. There's no SS in the organization. In the outfield, the long term fix is to replace Wells, but there's no rush. Snider and Lind need to play everyday.

I hope I don't see any veterans on the bench and that Overbay and the free agents to be in the pen are in high demand at the trading deadline.
I'm afraid you'd have to package several players to get any return and that's hard to do in the middle of the year.

ComebyDeanChance - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 06:40 PM EST (#211916) #

Well, to put in perspective, in 2000 the Jays trailed two teams in their division by a total of 6.5 games (the Yankees by 4.5 and the Red Sox by 2). The next year they trailed the same two teams by a total of 18.5 games, Ash was fired and Ricciardi brought in.

In 2009, Ricciardi's last, they trailed 3 teams by a total of 57 games. And they dealt Roy Halladay afterwards.

I'd say 'no hope' is a bit of an understatement.

ComebyDeanChance - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 07:01 PM EST (#211917) #

but giving up 690 while scoring 750, that seems much more likely

The chances that the Jays will give up 690 runs or less in a 162 game 2010 season are miniscule. In 2009, a total of 0 teams in the AL gave up 690 or fewer runs. Who exactly do you think will be pitching in 2010 for Toronto? The only chance Toronto has to give up that few runs is to quit part way through the season.

Spifficus - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 07:52 PM EST (#211918) #

And what's the odds of finding those?

Baltimore managed to find their prospective 3B of the future at the deadline for a mediocre closer. Cleveland found their catcher of the future the year before for an average 3B. There are teams that are vulnerable at 3B that could come calling. Teams are always looking for back of bullpen relievers, and Toronto has about 50 of those. Internally, there are rebound candidates in Scott Campbell, Brad Emaus and Justin Jackson that might be able to cover spots on the left side of the infield. There are some OF prospects that may assert themselves. There are usually a couple of interesting players out of options dealt at the end of spring for either a better fitting piece, or a prospect that doesn't require a 25-man roster spot.

Basically, that's the point of looking - the opportunities haven't been discovered yet. If they had, Toronto may have already filled those positions.

christaylor - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 07:53 PM EST (#211919) #

The comment had little to nothing to do with what I actually believe the number of runs the Jays will allow. The absolute number is contextual, 2010 could see a cold April (like 2008) and the Jays schedule (I haven't checked) could could contain a bunch of these cold low scoring games. It was simply this -- I believe the BP projection of the Jays scoring 706 runs as much as I believe that the Jays will allow 690, which is to say not very much at all. The only way the Jays will only score 706 runs is to quit part way through the season.

Who are the Jays starters? I intentionally picked 2008 not because it was one of the best seasons for Jays run prevention but because the B-R list of the 6 SP has (save the obvious) pitchers who will probably each start a game for the Jays in 2010. Sure the obvious subtractions leave 460 IP to fill, but that'll be sorted out. How many here thought Romero would make the 2009 roster out of spring training? Before I prognosticate on how good/bad the Jays 2010 starters will be, or even who they are, I'd like to at least get to spring training.

Lastly, the idea that the O's are a .500 team in 2010 while the Jays will be flirting with 100 losses. That seems ridiculous. The Jays might just be beginning the process but the Jays are in better shape than the O's are now because of the state JP left the organization in.

Mylegacy - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 08:14 PM EST (#211920) #

No hope? Nonsense! No "realistic non-supernatural intervention" hope? That's the question.

The problem - and the point of most interest - this year will be the starting pitching. The REASON it'll be so interesting is that the five who will most likely be our initial five starters - Marcum, Romero, Morrow, Rzepski and Cecil will be replaced as they fail, and or are passed, by several of: Drabek, Stewart, McGowan and Litsch. Realistically, I would not be surprised to see after the All Star break our starting rotation looking like: Marcum, Rzepski, Drabek, Stewart and McGowan with Cecil and Romero frothing at the mouth to get in on the action.

Offensively - wow - we could really be quite exciting or rather ordinary - in any case, buy a lot of cases of beer (or scotch in my case), sit back and ENJOY what should be a highly entertaining season.

Go Jays! Surely it's April now - isn't it?

Ryan Day - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 08:25 PM EST (#211921) #

There's no SS in the organization.

There are serveral, though none have played above A-ball. But Jackson, Pastornicky, and Pierre all have potential.

Shane - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 08:44 PM EST (#211922) #

Did anyone notice in John Perrotto's entry today over at Prospectus that he comments on Travis Snider being "more receptive to the advice of manager Cito Gaston and hitting coach Gene Tenace after admittedly tuning them out last year". Perhaps this isn't new news, i'd maybe just never seen it said as plainly as this. Scary. As well, i'm happy to hear in the Toronto Star today that Gaston is open to the idea of Alex Gonzalez hitting second. Wonderful. It's going to be one sweet ass line-up, oh yes.

Jim - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 09:58 PM EST (#211924) #

If you are complaining about Barajas... I can't wait for you to see a steady diet of John Buck.

Listen, this Orioles rebuild is never going to get them to the playoffs, they will be lucky if they finish above .500 two years in a row, but if you don't think they are closer to contending then the Blue Jays are then you have your head in the sand. The Jays could win more games then the O's this year because the Orioles pitching is a house of cards, but Weiters/Jones/Markakis is about as good a trio of young position players as you'll find in baseball.

brent - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 10:41 PM EST (#211925) #

I think the assumption with the O's going forward is that they are going to take on more payroll and get some free agent help to supplement their core. Now whether they can effectively do that will be the thing to look for. This offseason's trades and signings don't look promising (but perhaps adequate) for Baltimore.

christaylor - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 10:43 PM EST (#211926) #

Offensively Buck v. Barajas has to be called a wash. Buck is younger and has more upside... heck Barajas could even re-sign w/the Jays if he's really hurting for a job.

My head may be in the sand, perhaps. But in two sentences you go from the O's being closer to contention than the Jays to the O's pitching being a house of cards (I don't see it being better than the Jays' in the next 5 years).

I'd rather have the pitching the Jays have accumulated than Jones (wake me when his OPS+ breaks 110 and similar hitters through age 23 - Junior Felix), Lind and Snider than Markakis, and well, I'll give you Weiters, but he seems to be a once a generation player who won't stay with the O's for very long (but I think we agree on this).

Thoughts: because of the last decade Jays fans seem to have a very skewed notion of what contending means... much of this has to do with the 06-09 strategy of JP building good teams that he hoped would get lucky and Ash going for broke with a 2000 team that wasn't a pitcher away despite how it looked at the end of July. That an some sort of weird jealousy concerning the way the ownership of BOS and NYY spends. Toronto sports fans are lame, Toronto baseball fans even more so... let's learn who's on the team before we declare that they are losers. Despite the loss of Roy (I already have tickets for all three PHI games) this team isn't that much different from an 09 team that overachieved in the first half and imploded in the second.

Predictions: The Jays will be tied for 1st on at least one day of the regular season. The Jays will be closer to 80 wins than 100 losses.

Facts: I'll be at the Dome more than usual because ticket resellers will be unloading for cheap and it is easy to persuade people (read: dates) to come to a game with me if the cost of a ticket for them approaches zero.

I'm with Mylegacy, is it April yet? How about now...? Beer for me please, even overpriced SkyDome beer.

christaylor - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 11:00 PM EST (#211927) #

"Instead you have to hope that things go very wrong for two powerful teams."

I know I agreed to disagree, thus it might appear vaguely childish to comment again -- but I don't just have a hope that the powerful teams will have things go wrong but rather an outstanding bet that things will go wrong for one powerful team (BOS). The bet was over/under on the number of wins BOS will have relative to last year. But that's another debate... on the other hand I would not be surprised in the least if the Yankees won a 100 games.

Regression to the mean will get one a long way in prediction -- on average. I don't think Lind or Hill are "the average player" or players whose performance can be predicted by regressing their performance to the mean of their previous ML stats. If Snider doesn't improve then I'll be surprised. I hope/wish that Wallace turns the organizations head around in ST and gets a shot at 3B (long shot). Wells will be better. The offence will score significantly more than 706 runs, of that I'm certain, where you set the over/under is up to you.

Jim - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 11:08 PM EST (#211928) #

You have to hope that things go wrong for two powerful teams because Tampa is a powerful team.

If you could combine the Orioles and Blue Jays you might be able to put together a team in the next few years that could contend for the division. Neither one of them has the core and system to get there in this cycle yet on their own. They might be able to continue to add talent, but the Jays have pretty much cashed in all their chips on the major league roster except for Lind and Hill. I think the Orioles are closer because people are confusing the Jays' quantity of starting pitching with quality of starting pitching.

Honestly, if someone was willing to take even money that neither the Orioles or Blue Jays make the playoffs in the next 5 seasons I'd be more then happy to bet against either of those teams reaching the promised land. If either finish within 10 games of third in the next two seasons I'd be shocked.

katman - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 11:14 PM EST (#211929) #

Do you honestly believe that there is "no hope," and if so, how -- if at all -- does this affect your status as a game-going or (for those more distant) boxscore-following fan?

Yes. Which lowers my interest, but dosn't remove it.

If the team jumps off to a genuinely promising and surprising start -- say, something like 20-11 after five weeks -- do your expectations change? (Note, I said "expectations," not "hopes.")

Not at all.

How does your reaction differ, if at all, from right now if that same five-week start is, say, something like 7-24?

Since that's closer to my expectations than 20-11 is, my reaction and expectations do not change here, either.

If you are (presumably) a Jays fan and do buy the "Jays have no hope of contending this year" premise, is there another team for whom you are rooting? (Not "rooting against," so no "Anybody but the Red Sox" type answers here, please.)

Philadelphia. Go, Doc!

If you believe, like many have indicated, that 2010 is a necessary "rebuilding" year, then in some odd way, wouldn't you hope the Jays don't have a surprisingly decent 84-78 (or even 80-82) type of year, as this could be a long-term setback?

Sort of, yeah. High draft picks, baby!

If the Jays CAN contend -- and I haven't heard or read anybody who's really taken up that case -- what needs to happen for that to occur?

Cumbre Veja, a volcano on La Palma Island off the East Coast of Africa, collapses catastrophically. 6 hours later, several 30-50 meter high tsunamis (no, that is not a misprint) hit the eastern coast of the United States, including combined waves with heights of 100 meters or more. Large swathes of Baltimore, New York, and Boston as we know them all cease to exist. All members of the NY Yankees, Boston Red Sox, Baltimore Orioles, and Tampa Bay Rays are killed in their hotels.

The Jays happen to be on the West Coast at the time. They spend the rest of the season competing against minor-league agglomerations of their opponents, and play them in minor league stadia located many miles inland. They narrowly eke out a 1st place berth.

Jim - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 11:15 PM EST (#211930) #

The idea that John Buck has upside is laughable. I'm going to bookmark this thread and by May 1st any defense of John Buck is going to look ridiculous.

Imagine taking all the crapiness of Rod Barajas at the plate... and then taking away his ability to control the running game. Carl Crawford sits up at night and can't sleep because he's so excited to run against John Buck.

The only upside that Buck provides is that the games will be quicker because the ball won't roll to the backstop on every pitch.

Spifficus - Wednesday, February 17 2010 @ 11:37 PM EST (#211931) #

Honestly, if someone was willing to take even money that neither the Orioles or Blue Jays make the playoffs in the next 5 seasons I'd be more then happy to bet against either of those teams reaching the promised land.

Sure, the presence of Boston and New York in the division make the odds difficult, but I can't understand why a Jays fan would be more than happy to make that bet. Talk about your bittersweet payday...

robertdudek - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 12:31 AM EST (#211932) #

Despite the loss of Roy (I already have tickets for all three PHI games) this team isn't that much different from an 09 team that overachieved in the first half and imploded in the second.

The absence of Roy in and of itself makes the team much different.

Also, no Alex Rios, Scott Rolen, Marco Scutaro, Rod Barajas.

robertdudek - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 12:43 AM EST (#211933) #

More accurately, the Jays offense may be ordinary or it may be abysmal.

Ryan Day - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 04:24 AM EST (#211934) #

Also, no Alex Rios, Scott Rolen, Marco Scutaro, Rod Barajas.

Losing Rios (v.2009, at least) and Barajas won't have much impact on the offence. Scutaro and Rolen hurt, obviously.

But they raise an interesting point about expectations: If I'd claimed a year ago that the Jays would receive near All-Star seasons from Scutaro and Rolen, what would your response have been?

scottt - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 06:31 AM EST (#211935) #

That was more or less what I expected from Rolen. There was not much point trading Troy Glaus for him if he couldn't produce with the bat.

scottt - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 06:50 AM EST (#211936) #

CBS Power Ranking aptly describes the odds of the Jays competing.

1. Yankees
2. Red Sox
3. Rays

20. Orioles

29. Blue Jays

"Hate the ...: Utter futility of this situation."

The guy completely dimisses the offense and calls the Jays "a solid defensive team in 2010, which should allow the pitchers to put the ball over the plate without fearing for their ERAs" . I'd be curious to see his starting lineup.

Jim - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 08:20 AM EST (#211937) #

but I can't understand why a Jays fan would be more than happy to make that bet. Talk about your bittersweet payday...

What's the alternative? Blindly fooling myself into thinking that they are a few pieces away from competing? I'm in my mid 30's and grew up obsessed over 2 horrendous teams. I don't stop being a fan because the team isn't any good, but I'm way too old to try and convince myself that this team has a prayer before 2012. I am still going to enjoy the season and I'm dying because this will be the first time in about 10 years I don't get to go to spring training.

Spifficus - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 09:08 AM EST (#211938) #

It just always seems like you're relishing the hopelessness. I mean, not simply looking at the reality of the situation, but actually reveling it. It just comes across as a case of Schadenfreude.

There are enough reasons to at least hold out some hope for the future of the team - 2 star level players. One player a year removed from being an elite prospect. 3 decent-to-good prospects at C. A very good 1B prospect. Some longer odds options for SS, 3B and OF. High upside pitchers, with lots of 'filler' options surrounding them to hold the fort. It all gives you something to hope on, if you want to. Deluding yourself into thinking they'll be long term powerhouse contenders, 95 win teams, starting in 2010? That's not what's going on. It just seems a bit too soon to joyfully write off a half-decade of play.

robertdudek - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 10:54 AM EST (#211940) #

The esteemed Sean Smith has added his 2010 projected standings based on a "starting lineup" method - that is, using the core lineup plus 7 pitchers on the staff. He explains his method a little further, but here are the numbers:

http://www.baseballprojection.com/2010/optimist2010.htm

AL EAST: Yanks 98, Sox 93, Rays 88, Orioles 75 Jays 70

Actually, he has the Jays winning fewer games than anyone else in MLB.

Also, he has the AL WEST as only 8 games between top (Rangers) and bottom (Mariners). He notes that the Angels have exceeded his projections 6 years in a row. Should be an interesting race.

Matthew E - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 11:04 AM EST (#211941) #

AL EAST: Yanks 98, Sox 93, Rays 88, Orioles 75 Jays 70

Actually, he has the Jays winning fewer games than anyone else in MLB.

I don't see that happening. I mean, maybe the Jays will clock in with only 70 wins; I think they can beat that mark but it's not unreasonable. But how often does it happen that 70 wins is the low-water mark for major league teams? There isn't that much parity in MLB. And I'd be quite surprised if the Jays were the worst team in baseball. There's just too much talent around for them to be that bad.

robertdudek - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 11:16 AM EST (#211942) #

I think you are misinterpreting these projections.

Due to variance and many other factors, teams will over- or under-perform their core talent. The teams that actually win less than 70 games this year will be the ones that are projected to win 70-80, but suffer from injuries, bad luck in close games, under-performce of key players or perhaps a lack of depth or a combination of the above.

This is meant to be a snapshot of current core major league talent. And it aptly illustrates the long road ahead for the organisation.

whiterasta80 - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 11:50 AM EST (#211943) #

Ok here goes
Do you honestly believe that there is "no hope," and if so, how -- if at all -- does this affect your status as a game-going or (for those more distant) boxscore-following fan? Yes I honestly believe that there is no hope. Generally speaking I'll probably be more of a fan than when there was "some hope" just because I can latch on the the young talent and look to the future. But my "fandom" is really dependent on the Blue Jays radio distribution. If a game is on the radio and I can catch it, I'll be listening.

If the team jumps off to a genuinely promising and surprising start -- say, something like 20-11 after five weeks -- do your expectations change? (Note, I said "expectations," not "hopes.") Nope, because the commitment and chips needed to sustain that start won't be there. We didn't have the prospects (and possibly budget) to add V-Mart, and Lee last season and we won't have the prospects this year either (see below).

How does your reaction differ, if at all, from right now if that same five-week start is, say, something like 7-24? I'll feel bad for the youngsters playing in front of an empty stadium. Otherwise I'll be the same.

If you are (presumably) a Jays fan and do buy the "Jays have no hope of contending this year" premise, is there another team for whom you are rooting? (Not "rooting against," so no "Anybody but the Red Sox" type answers here, please.) The Phillies because they have Doc. And quite frankly I think its best for the Sox and Yanks to continue to win. Its the only way to make a case for realignment. So I'd never root against them.

If you believe, like many have indicated, that 2010 is a necessary "rebuilding" year, then in some odd way, wouldn't you hope the Jays don't have a surprisingly decent 84-78 (or even 80-82) type of year, as this could be a long-term setback? Quite the opposite, while I think that the "high pick" would be nice, an 84-78 year probably moves some FA Type B's to Type A and Type C's to Type B. I'll take the multiple extra picks over one top pick.

If the Jays CAN contend -- and I haven't heard or read anybody who's really taken up that case -- what needs to happen for that to occur?
1. Someone needs to completely replace Doc and then someone needs to compliment him. So two of below
Internal options: Marcum takes the next step, Morrow sets the world on fire, Romero improves dramatically, Drabek arrives way sooner than expected.
External options: we acquire Matt Cain/Brandon Webb.
2. We need decent 3 and 4 starters:
Internally: Marcum, Morrow, McGowan, Romero, Rzep or Cecil are all candidates for decent #3/4's.
Externally: I dunno, maybe Bonderman, and Lilly?
3. Overbay needs to go, and his replacement needs power: Internally: Brett Wallace is ready now... really ready. Or I guess Lind could move here (but then we'd need a DH).
Externally: Adrian Gonzalez, for the love of God please!
4. We need a lights out closer:
Internally: Accardo , or a smoke and mirrors season from Gregg (only two options in my opinion).
Externally: Not alot of options: Huston Street or Mike Gonzalez?
5. We need a leadoff man and CF, and it probably has to be the same guy. Thus Wells:RF, Snider:LF, Lind:DH
Internally: Darin Mastroianni duplicates his AA numbers in the biggs.
Externally: Nate McLouth maybe?
6. Find a SS.
Internally: Alex Gonzalez repeats 2007... even still.
Externally: Jhonny Peralta I guess.
7. We need a Catcher.
Internally: JPA learns the strike zone
Externally: AJP
8. Everyone else has to match their best seasons.

That's a heck of alot of things that need to go right. Realistically we should hold our pieces and try again when there are more chips in place. Personally I'd keep Wallace and Drabek out of the bigs until September.

christaylor - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 12:11 PM EST (#211944) #

From Smith's site: "The results will be biased towards front line heavy teams that have little depth."

That seems to work against the Jays in this instance for both hitting and (even more so) pitching. Smith uses r/150 and, boy-o-boy do Alex Gonzalez ever look ugly using that measure. Let's hope Cito doesn't just keep rolling them out there if that pair are that horrible, or that AA doesn't give him the choice. If that pair is terrible then let's see JPA, Chavez or anyone. If Alex Gonzalez v2.0 is -23 and only average on defense, let's see what J-Mac can do. If the Jays just plug and chug the line-up as Smith's analysis assumes they are toast, last in the AL burnt toast. No surprise there...

The rotation, well, I don't think anyone has a good handle on how that'll play out, if they believe they do, they're probably wrong. It is always fun to guess, but not at this point in the year and not this year in general.

robertdudek - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 12:18 PM EST (#211945) #

Smith also does a "depth" projection, using a full roster. The Jays do worse under that scenario.

robertdudek - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 12:22 PM EST (#211946) #

If that pair is terrible then let's see JPA, Chavez or anyone. If Alex Gonzalez v2.0 is -23 and only average on defense, let's see what J-Mac can do. If the Jays just plug and chug the line-up as Smith's analysis assumes they are toast, last in the AL burnt toast. No surprise there...

The other teams will also be trying to replace their worst players/call guys up from the minors. You seem to be chronically focusing only on the things the Jays might do, seemingly ignoring the things their competitors might do.

That is the real value of Smith's projection exercise. While not accounting for a host of factors, it has the great advantage that it is not nearly as subject to fan bias as the type of analysis typically found on sites like this.

John Northey - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 01:14 PM EST (#211947) #

One item of hope for Jay fans - the Rays owner is super-cheap.

Rays Owner Sternberg: Payroll to go down after this season
http://www.tboblogs.com/index.php/sports/comments/sternberg-payroll-to-go-down-after-this-season/

His goal is to shoot his payroll from about $70 million this year to under $60 million in 2011. Thus I'd say we should see the Rays vanish from contention a lot faster than anyone hoped/expected. So this winter expect an Expos-type fire sale, and maybe a bit of a rebound in 2012/13 from some prospects they get before a complete collapse.

So, since the Jays don't figure to be contenders in 2010 this is good news. Rays get weaker long term, the Orioles might improve but need pitching, the Yanks/Red Sox are ... well ... OK, they still are a roadblock but at least the Rays won't be unless killer trades are made next winter.

katman - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 02:03 PM EST (#211949) #

<i>"Quite the opposite, while I think that the "high pick" would be nice, an 84-78 year probably moves some FA Type B's to Type A and Type C's to Type B. I'll take the multiple extra picks over one top pick."</i>

That's an interesting perspective. Would have to see how many FA potential players we have, and who, to evaluate it - but I could see myself changing my mind and agreeing with this.

christaylor - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 02:08 PM EST (#211950) #

"You seem to be chronically focusing only on the things the Jays might do, seemingly ignoring the things their competitors might do."

This is where hope comes in -- I hope AA and his team will be at tick better than everyone else.

"It has the great advantage that it is not nearly as subject to fan bias as the type of analysis typically found on sites like this."

Bias cuts both ways -- Toronto sports fans in general and Jays fans in particular have seem to develop a chronic negative bias. To the point where good teams assembled in the are considered lousy. That this year is a year where the Jays are to be expected to be worse than last year, a year when they were bad, only amplifies that problem.

As for the value of his (and other such as BP) projection exercises -- I evaluate them not on how they do after the season, rather than before. Typically they do quite poorly, especially with respect to capturing the variance among W-L across the league. Aggregates of fan projections often do much better.

At least until April 5th, I'll stick with my bias/hope that the Jays will be closer to 80 wins than 70.

92-93 - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 02:57 PM EST (#211951) #

If you could combine the Orioles and Blue Jays you might be able to put together a team in the next few years that could contend for the division. Neither one of them has the core and system to get there in this cycle yet on their own.

Would a combination team really have no playoff chances let alone in 2010, but 2011 too? I'm not sure, I think it's a pretty damn good team.

C : Matt Wieters
1B : Adam Lind
2B : Brian Roberts
SS : Cesar Izturis
3B : Aaron Hill
LF : Vernon Wells
CF : Adam Jones
RF : Nick Markakis
DH : Travis Snider / Garrett Atkins

BN : Nolan Reimold
BN : Raul Chavez
BN : Alex Gonzalez

SP : Kevin Milwood
SP : Shaun Marcum
SP 3/4/5 & RP7 : Brian Matusz, Chris Tillman, Jake Arrieta, Jeremy Guthrie, Ricky Romero, Brendan Morrow, Brett Cecil, Mark Rzepczynski
RP : Jim Johnson
RP : Mike Gonzalez
RP : Scott Downs
RP : Jason Frasor
RP : Cla Meredith
RP : Jesse Carlson

I think this is a high 80s win team with the chance for more with expected growth from some of the young arms.

whiterasta80 - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 03:02 PM EST (#211952) #

Yeah I didn't really look at how many FA's we have when I said it. I was thinking as a more broad philosophy. Its possible, now that you mention it, that we don't have enough pending FA's for that to matter.

Jim - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 07:24 PM EST (#211953) #

It just seems a bit too soon to joyfully write off a half-decade of play.

I'm not joyful about it at all. It doesn't matter what I think or what anyone thinks anyway, that is why they play the games. If this team were in any other division this rebuild would be very exciting because there would be a good chance that you could dream of 2012 and 2013 and what could be. As long as Theo and Cashman are running the 10,000 lb gorillas, it's hard to see the core that this team has at this exact moment turning into a team like Tampa that could make the playoffs 1 or 2 times. Look at the stories coming out of Tampa today, they are already talking about how Crawford and Pena will be gone next year and projecting a lower payroll. They put together an unbelievable system and core of young players and it might not ever be enough to make the playoffs a second time.

Spifficus - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 11:08 PM EST (#211954) #

It is a shame to hear their payroll outlook, but Toronto's more equipped to keep its top talent, and augment, than Tampa. The keys are adding enough talent to the organization (and then add some more), and then figuring out which pieces are worth keeping at cost when the time comes. Until they're done the 2010-2011 auditions schedule, it feels impossible to comment on where they'll be beyond that.

uglyone - Thursday, February 18 2010 @ 11:54 PM EST (#211955) #

Would/Could this team contend?

1) .275/.350/.400/.750ops
2) .300/.325/.475/.825ops
3) .300/.350/.550/.900ops
4) .250/.350/.500/.850ops
5) .275/.325/.475/.800ops
6) .275/.350/.450/.800ops
7) .275/.350/.450/.800ops
8) .225/.300/.400/.700ops
9) .225/.275/.375/.650ops

SP) 200ip, 3.75era
SP) 175ip, 4.00era
SP) 175ip, 4.25era
SP) 175ip, 4.75era
SP) 200ip, 5.50era

CL) 70ip, 3.75era
SU) 70ip, 4.00era
SU) 70ip, 4.00era
MR) 65ip, 4.25era
MR) 65ip, 4.25era
LR) 80ip, 4.50era
LR) 80ip, 4.50era

Mick Doherty - Friday, February 19 2010 @ 12:34 AM EST (#211956) #

Predictions: The Jays will be tied for 1st on at least one day of the regular season. The Jays will be closer to 80 wins than 100 losses.

On your first point, I understand what you mean, but it's actually not true. If, for instance, the Yankees win on Opening Day and the Jays don't play until the next day, they could start the season a half game out and never get to the top spot. But that's ticky-tack. I really find your second point interesting, though -- a 71-91 record would be nine games from both 80 wins and 100 losses -- so you're placing the strict over/under on the Jays '10 wins at +/- 71? Sounds about right, I guess ...

TamRa - Friday, February 19 2010 @ 12:43 AM EST (#211957) #

I don't really WANT this team to contend because it's too flawed.

I want things like this:

1. Snider finds his stride and steps up to the same elite class of young hitters that players like Jay Bruce and Colby Rasmus are expected to be in and guys like Jones and Kemp have become;

2. Lind repeats and proves he is in fact a guy you can expect to get over .900 OPS every year;

3. Hill maintains a similar level of productivity at least, and gets back to his bet glove work;

4. Wells establishes that 2009 was a fluke, even if it's not possible for him to justify his deal;

5. Overbay and Encarnacion have great first halfs to make themselves marketable trade chips in July;

6.The Jays' offensive woes can all be blamed on filler guys who are not part of the future anyway (Buck, Gonzo, Bautista)

7. The most talented of the young pitchers play up to their abilities;

8. Whatever trades are made bring in solid promise at positions of critical need (i.e. SS, 3B and RF)

9. that after August 1, with Wallace (and hopefully other young talent) in the lineup the young Jays take off and play two months of impressive ball to gain momentum for 2011;

That, too me, is a winning year, no matter how many accumulate in the left column.

brent - Friday, February 19 2010 @ 03:18 AM EST (#211958) #

CBS Power Rankings

They rank the Yankees, Red Sox, Rays 1-2-3 in all of baseball and then give no credit to other teams that play in their division. Jays rank = 29! Hey, the Jays won't be so hot this year, but it's not like they play in the NL.

Glevin - Friday, February 19 2010 @ 04:35 AM EST (#211960) #

I think if you reduce enjoyment of a team to simply them winning or not, you miss the great joy of baseball. Any given night, anything can happen. Baseball is a sport that demands patience. The pleasure is more in the process than in the outcome. This team has no hope of contending and very little hope of being .500. (Who is their ace? The guy who has the 1.5 WHIP last year or the guy who missed the entire year with an injury?) I think, however, I will find this team less frustrating than the teams of the past few years. This is a team in clear rebuilding mode with some excellent prospects to watch. The last few years, the Jays didn't have a hope either but were just floundering around making conservative sideways moves that seemed like an attempt to try to stay near .500. THAT was frustrating. Would you rather see a 70-win year where young talent develops well or an 75-win year on the backs of Lyle Overbay, Alex Gonzalez, and Jose Bautista? There are, in 2010, for the first time in many years, defined and reasonable goals: Let the young guys develop and build for the future.

scottt - Friday, February 19 2010 @ 07:11 AM EST (#211961) #

The Power Rankings are based on odds of winning the Worlds Series more than wins/losses.
The Jays would rank higher if they where in another division.

This seems to be the last year for the Rays and I think they have a better team than Boston.
I wouldn't mind seeing them in the post season.

whiterasta80 - Friday, February 19 2010 @ 09:17 AM EST (#211962) #

Only reason I don't want the Rays in the playoffs is for the previously mentioned realignment case. I'll be another 15 years minimum if they make the playoffs.

christaylor - Friday, February 19 2010 @ 10:58 AM EST (#211963) #

I think I phrased the prediction that the Jays will be tied for first on one day correctly so that it must be true. But you're definitely right because the Sox/Yankees play on the night before, one will win. However, they don't play the next day and the Jays play Texas. So they could be tied w/the Yankees on the day after the home opener.

At any rate, it was a prediction -- it can still be true, 3, 5, 7, 11...games into the season (and not that improbable even for a .400 team v. two .600). I like the old cliche of everyone is tied on opening day but I think someone pointed out to me when I said once that MLB doesn't actually post official standings until everyone plays a game (this might be misinformation or misremembering on my part).

The second point, yes. Over/Under of 71 wins and I'd take the over almost every time I make that bet (hedging is fun).

Ryan Day - Friday, February 19 2010 @ 12:30 PM EST (#211965) #

The Jays site has a story on Bruce Walton taking over as pitching coach. I'm optimistic that losing Arnsberg might not be as bad as I initially feared - Walton has been around the pitching staff, which has produced some strong relievers. And Rick Langford is joining the coaching staff, and he's worked with many of these pitchers in the minors, where they've been successful. So one could assume there will be some consistency in approach, at the very least.

dan gordon - Friday, February 19 2010 @ 03:49 PM EST (#211966) #

Saw on Rotoworld that the Blue jays have added another non-hitter to their lineup, signing catcher Jose Molina to a 1-year contract for $400,000 plus incentives, with a team option for 2011 at $1.2 million. Molina hit a lusty .217 last year with an OPS of .560. Good defensive catcher.

Ryan Day - Friday, February 19 2010 @ 05:04 PM EST (#211967) #

For all the fidgeting about the Jays have done at catcher, they may as well have just re-signed Barajas (who can't get work anyway) and kept some continuity with the pitching staff.

92-93 - Friday, February 19 2010 @ 05:18 PM EST (#211968) #

There's added value in signing Jose Molina, in that it increases the likelihood somebody gives Barajas an MLB deal and the Jays get the Type B compensation. That aside, it's nice to have Chavez in AAA as the backup C instead of having to potentially rely on Arencibia or Jeroloman if one of their catchers got hurt.

Timbuck2 - Friday, February 19 2010 @ 10:06 PM EST (#211969) #

Interesting story today in the Star about some of our pitchers - Daniel "Lord" Farquhar and Chard Jenkins.

http://www.thestar.com/sports/article/767928--battle-is-forming-in-young-arms-race

martinthegreat - Saturday, February 20 2010 @ 03:58 AM EST (#211971) #

I like to think we have a small shot. not big, but I'm not going into this season hopeless.

Basically, if everything works perfectly, we can have a winning team. We have several solid players, so if others emerge in the starting pitching and hitting who knows? look at the 2001 angels for example. so many players emerged or had career years: Washburn (ERA+ 141, career 109), Ramon Ortiz (ERA+ 117, career 97), Brendan Donnelly emerged, Percival (231 ERA+, 146 career), Garrett Anderson (127 OPS+, his best, 104 career), Adam Kennedy (110 OPS+, 89 career), Eckstein (only year he had a OPS+ over 100), Spiezio (first full year with an OPS+ over 100, at 115, before that was all under), Ben Weber (171 ERA+, 118 career) and even Fullmer (133 OPS+, 111 career). And that's not even including the emergence of Francisco Rodriguez for the last few weeks and playoffs.

Our winning would have to come from rookies and inexperienced players breaking out (like Donnelly). I could see this from Snider, Ruiz (personally I am excited to see what he can do). We'd also have to get Vernon to step up to the plate again, clearly, and put together a good year. Our pitching is talented if inexperienced. If a few become really good started (with Marcum, Morrow, Eveland, Janssen, Richmond (who was really good until he got injured), Rzep, and Cecil... who knows? would it be a stretch for 3 to post ERAs in the 3s, and 2 more to be in the 4 to low 5 range? perhaps. but a "stretch" is still possible.

in short, if things come together extremely well, with the emergence of several players and the re-emergence of Vernon, who knows? I am not ready to discount the season yet.

Mike Green - Monday, February 22 2010 @ 12:24 PM EST (#212003) #

I am late to the party due to a holiday.

What would it take for the Jays to be a contender in 2010? Basically, breakout seasons from three of the young starting pitchers and modestly better than expected performance from everyone else. Could Cecil and Zep deliver 200 very good innings each in 2010? Of course. Neither has every thrown that many innings in a year, but their minor league records are excellent. Each could be Mike Mussina or Sam Militello. Ricky Romero and David Purcey could also be good. Could Vernon Wells have a recovery season as good as Torii Hunter, 2009? Of course. Could Travis Snider and Adam Lind each be one of the top 10 hitters in the league? Yes. Could Aaron Hill trade some pop for better plate discipline as pitchers become more careful with him? Definitely. Could Edwin Encarnacion blossom into an average defender at third after an off-season with the benefit of Buttefield's tutelage? Quite possibly.

The positive side is that predicting young pitchers comes with a wider error bar, and it would not surprise me at all if two of the young pitchers do emerge. But that probably won't be enough in a very tough division. My guess is that the Jays would probably be 20-1 or 25-1 in the AL West, and they might be 400-1 or 500-1 in the AL East.

uglyone - Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 12:58 AM EST (#212013) #

not so sure THAT many things have to "break right".

2 of Marcum, McGowan, Litsch manage to be healthy and similarly productive as they were pre-injury.

2 of Morrow, Rzepczynski, Romero continue to perform like they did last year, but for longer.

1 of Snider, Wallace, Ruiz joins Lind as a legit power bat in the middle of the order.

If that happens, I think we'd be pretty good......and I'm not so sure that we'd have to be extraordinarily lucky for that to happen.

of course, we'd have to have some good luck.

Mike Green - Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 10:50 AM EST (#212017) #

Jesse Litsch will not be back until July, I thought. Dustin McGowan's best season of his young career was 170 innings of 109 ERA+.

The positive side, I think, is that this club will have a season like the 1990 Braves with the "equivalent" of Smoltz, Glavine and Avery percolating. Travis Snider can be the club's David Justice. Who will be the Terry Pendleton of 2011, 2012 or 2013? When will the Jays effectively be marketed as Canada's team (Own the Stadium?)?

John Northey - Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 12:01 PM EST (#212019) #

There is the magic bullet - we need at least 2 or 3 kids to develop into high level pitchers.

Don't know if I'd want the Jays to follow Atlanta's method - they had their mediocre period from 1980-1984 (complete with overpaid closer who got hurt, although they got lucky and made the playoffs with just 89 wins one year). Then came 6 years of sub-73 win seasons (just one 72 win, rest sub-70). However, the period after was killer - 14 playoff years and one strike year (wildcard position).

In 1990 they had 6 of the 8 guys staring 5+ games under 25 years old. Those 6 were (name/ERA+) Smoltz/104, Glavine/94, Avery/71 (20 years old), Pete Smith/84, Derek Lilliquist/64, and Paul Marak/109. 2 likely HOF'ers (Smoltz in 3rd season, Glavine his 4th straight under 100 ERA+) plus a couple of good role players (Avery would have 3 solid years in a row after this season followed by 3 more injury filled ones). Kent Mercker was in the pen at 22 and would have a few very good pen years and a few good rotation years.

Team ERA+ in 1990? 88. OPS+? 90. Ugh. 1991 saw a 98 OPS+ but a 112 ERA+ to push them into the playoffs (huh, forgot Jim Clancy was in their bullpen in 91 - threw 4 2/3 IP in the playoffs for them). A few good hitters also came along - David Justice, Ron Gant, and Jeff Blauser.

So, if we have 2 future HOF'ers and a few future All-Stars hanging around we might have something here :)

More realistically we have a few good young pitchers and have to hope one or two become consistent 110 ERA+ guys (Marcum, Romero?, Rzep?) and one or two can hang around 100 year in/year out (Cecil/Litsch/???). Hope that Lind/Snider can be our Justice/Gant and that someone emerges from the minors and surprises.

Remember, many solid players have been off the radar before they made it - for example, the 1989 team had Junior Felix, Liriano, Borders, Cerutti, David Wells, 'Goose' Gozzo - none of whom were viewed as much before they came to the majors iirc.

Chuck - Wednesday, February 24 2010 @ 02:59 PM EST (#212021) #

Own the Stadium

Or Pwn the Stadium, for the younger bauxites (it's a silent p, like in swimming).

"Since the Jays have no hope of contending this year ..." | 82 comments | Create New Account

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