Where's the "LIKE" button on here?

Well-played, young Master Rutt! Even getting the accent marks over the name in all the right place. Tres impressive! Oh, wait, in this case -- muy impressive!

Dear José

I'm sorry. I didn't mean it.

Your friend,
Damien

Hopefully Jo-Bau's push for 50 dingers sells some tickets in September, especially during the home stand from the 21st to 29th.

Back in 1990 when Cecil Fielder was on his was to becoming the first player since George Foster in 1977 to hit 50, he entered September with 42 and then proceeded to have by far his crappiest month of the season in terms of OPS.  Just when it looked like the chase had stalled at 49 after he went homerless in 5 straight games leading into the season finale at Yankee Stadium, he socked a pair against a couple of no-name September call-ups.  Great finish to the career year of a very likeable player.

Fangraphs has a story on Bautista today. Dave Cameron seems to believe his home run outburst may be somewhat sustainable.

Since September 1st, 2009, Jose Bautista has played 152 games and received 647 plate appearances. That’s one season’s worth of playing time. In those 152 games, he has launched 50 home runs. It’s time to stop wondering when he’s going to go back to the hitter he used to be. He’s not going to. He has taken a step forward.

Just a shame his 40th was followed by the media having to ask about the dumb column in the Star. Is it possible he took steroids? Yeah, but without a shred of evidence beyond his home run total the writer decided to do a column on it. Much like the 'White Jays' mess a few years back it seems the Star's sports department just can't stand a good news story and has to find a way to tear the team down instead.

If there was evidence (say, andro in the locker ala McGwire in 1998 which every media outlet pretty much ignored) then the article would've been not just fine but valuable. But when it is 100% based on stuff that a blogger would be embarassed to put online and it ends up at a major news outlet, well, that is just poor reporting/editing/etc.

Lovin' the sustained animosity between these clubs.  Bautista's stare and spit after number 40 will have repurcussions at some point during this series or the ones in September.  Didn't Scrabble stand up for teammate by throwing at the opposition at some point in the last 2 years?

I am just thrilled one of my reps offered me a pair of ducats for tonight's contest. It was nice hearing the crowd make noise in the late innings of yesterday's game, be even nicer if it carries over tonight.

Jose Bautista is fast becoming one of my favorite Jays.

He doesn't just get mad. He gets even. Run one high and up on me? I'll get you back.

And a special thanks to the home plate umpire for that called third strike on Granderson in the 9th. That was a gift. And I will gladly take it!

I don't see why Baustista couldn't have a good couple years after this one. While is ISO is crazy high and bound to drop there are other factors that look positive for him going into the future:

1) His BABIP is very low, like .240 low. If that rebounded more to like .270 he could hit quite a bit better next year average wise.
2) He is hitting more fly balls now with that new loft in his swing, and his HR/FB rate while high is still only top 5 in the majors high.
3) The guy has a good batting eye. He could always take walks, and this year even with the crazy HRs he is walking more and striking out less. He hacks for sure, but when he doesn't he knows how to take a walk.

I'd be happy giving this guy something like 2 years/18 million with a team option for the third. Something rather short term but fair.

There is another challenge for AA this winter. You have Bautista for one more year (arbitration) then he is a free agent. According to FanGraphs he has been worth negative dollars (sub-replacement) for his first 3 seasons, then $4.8 his last full year in Pittsburgh, then $2 million his year split, then $8.5 his first full year here, now $18.4 his second. Pretty clearly he was having issues in Pittsburgh getting things going, came here, something changed, and now he is an All-Star level guy.

So, is Bautista likely to continue as a guy worth $6.5 a year (his career average over 162) or will he stay as a $10+ guy? As per my earlier calculations you should put in a discount of 25%-35% for free agents on these figures thus $4.2 is his average, $15.8 (pro-rate his season so far, 65% of value) is his peak. So a contract mid-way would indicate neither side is positive or about $9-10 a year could be fair value. Less would indicate that Bautista is less sure, more would indicate AA is more sure that 2010 is for real. 2-3 years would be as far as either side should be willing to go I'd think. If AA gives a 29 year old coming off a career year more than 3 years then we should reassess what we think of him unless he gets a killer deal ($5 mil a year or less).

Bautista is not a big powerful guy, like sluggers from Babe Ruth and Jimmie Foxx down through Mark McGwire and Barry Bonds. He's listed at 6'0, 195. Which means he's roughly the same size as Henry Aaron and Ernie Banks, and he hits his home runs the same way - by whipping the bat through the zone. He generates some serious bat speed. But until he met Cito Gaston, he had a mechanical defect that wouldn't allow him to catch up to a decent major league fastball. This season, he's hit 34 fastballs over the fence.

And the Rogers tech guy came to my house this morning, and restored my internet. For my bewildered friends and admirers (both of you) wondering where the hell I've been these past few days, and why there was no TDIB yesterday. It seems the modem had gone bad....

You were gone?

8-P

Ah Rogers, the bane of our existence.

But until he met Cito Gaston, he had a mechanical defect that wouldn't allow him to catch up to a decent major league fastball. This season, he's hit 34 fastballs over the fence.

According to one post on this site (http://www.hittrackeronline.com/detail.php?id=2010_3448&type=hitter), Bautista hits his homer to left and center field (well I think the hitting trend is quite obvious to Jays' observer and fans.). Will he learn or adjust to hitting to the opposite field: it would certainly raise his batting average?

http://www.tangotiger.net/scout/index2.php?teamid=141&team=Toronto Blue Jays

Get over to the Book Blog and rate defense skills.

Will he learn or adjust to hitting to the opposite field: it would certainly raise his batting average?

I don't think so.  Why mess with a .950 OPS just to get a few opposite field hits.  He stands close enough to the plate to pull anything on the outer half with authority, yet nobody can get an inside fastball by him (at least not without some anxiety about the prospect).  To boot, he has a very good sense of where the outside half of the plate ends, such that he'll take a walk if they won't throw a strike.  Despite the phenomenal pull tendency, I see know reason to date to change the approach.

I'm looking at the GameCast of tonight's game and, you know, the Jays were trying to get back into it in the 7th and 8th, but they had four lineouts. Four! With decent luck it'd be something like 11-8 Yankees and maybe the game wouldn't be over quite yet.

I was wondering where Aaron Hill's disastrous 2010 campaign - they would have done just as well playing John McDonald every day - ranked among seasons turned in Jays second basemen over the years. I was sure that, horrid as he's been, he was nowhere near as bad as Carlos Garcia (who, by the way, is now the Pirates' first base coach.)

It turns out the team has actually done worse than the second Garcia, dreadful as that is to contemplate:

Year    Player            OPS+
        
1993    Roberto Alomar    141
1992    Roberto Alomar    129
2009    Aaron Hill        117
1994    Roberto Alomar    116
1991    Roberto Alomar    115
1995    Roberto Alomar    109
2007    Aaron Hill        107
1989    Nelson Liriano    105
2008    Joe Inglett       104
2004    Orlando Hudson     98
2002    Orlando Hudson     97
1988    Manuel Lee         96
1999    Homer Bush         96
1983    Damaso Garcia      95
1982    Damaso Garcia      94
1977    Steve Staggs       91
2005    Orlando Hudson     91
2006    Aaron Hill         91
2001    Homer Bush         89
2003    Orlando Hudson     87
1984    Damaso Garcia      86
1986    Damaso Garcia      83
1985    Damaso Garcia      82
1980    Damaso Garcia      81
2010    Aaron Hill         80
1998    Craig Grebeck      76
1978    Dave McKay         73
1990    Manuel Lee         71
1981    Damaso Garcia      64
1996    Tomas Perez        64
1979    Danny Ainge        50
1997    Carlos Garcia      47
1987    Garth Iorg         44
2000    Homer Bush         33

Of course, an important difference between Hill and the rest of the ne'er-do-wells at the bottom of the list is that the rest of those guys often lost the job before the season was over. Although quite a few of them (Iorg 1987, Grebeck 1998, Perez 1996, Lee 1990) were actually taking over from someone else who had been found wanting.

What is the likelihood that the team elects to take a pass on Hill's 3 option years (2012-2014) for a combined $26M, a decision they have to make before next season?

If I understand the contract properly, they can elect to pass on the three options now but exercise the two options for 2012-2013 AFTER the 2011 season, foregoing the right to exercise his 2014 $10M option.

Unless I am missing something, this wait-and-see (how things look after 2011) approach seems like the logical route to go. Upside: get one more year (2011) to see if his game returns. Downside: lose out on his age-32 season.

Before the Jays replace Aaron Hill, they'll need to figure out who to replace him with. Unless they move Escobar to second and bring Hech up, I don't see a better alternative.

It's been so much fun to watch Bautista hit this year. What bat speed! Those two home runs he hit against the Yankees weren't so much hit as obliterated. He'd better stop doing that bat flip thing, though, or he risks getting skulled.

As for the future: he probably won't hit this many home runs again, as pitchers will adjust to him. At some point, they'll just stop throwing him fastballs anywhere near the hitting zone. But he isn't a one-dimensional player, so he will retain value even if the big fly rate diminishes a bit - he has good strike zone judgement, a great throwing arm, and can play a passable third base. I suspect that the Jays will re-sign him: he likes it here and the Jays like him. When both sides want something to happen, it will likely get done.

On to 50!

Just as a fun guessing game, what would Bautista's potential extension be worth?

Without judging whether it would be a good or bad deal, I'm guessing 4 years, 32 million.

I don't see why Bautista and his agent would accept less than 4 years.  If he plays out his final arbitration season and has any kind of success (which seems quite likely to me)  he'll go into free agency as an extremely valuable commodity having made 5-6 million already.  A player with big defensive value, and an excellent power source,he would be poised to sign a large multi-year deal.  

I suspect that he believes in his ability, and will not give the Jays a large discount for the sake of security.

Will he learn or adjust to hitting to the opposite field: it would certainly raise his batting average?

The last guy to actually hit .400 spent his entire career refusing to hit to the opposite field. The Shift that we see for guys like Ortiz was originally invented for him.

Before the Jays replace Aaron Hill, they'll need to figure out who to replace him with.

True. Presumably his performance in 2011 will indicate if a replacement is required after 2011 or not until the end of 2013. I just can't see his options for 2012-2014 being picked up now, on the heels of this mess of a 2010 season. Better to reasses who Hill is as a player after 2011.

Just as a fun guessing game, what would Bautista's potential extension be worth?

Without judging whether it would be a good or bad deal, I'm guessing 4 years, 32 million.

If you changed that 3 to a 4 I think you might be more in the ballpark. Bautista is going to go into arbitration having been one of the 10 best hitters in the AL this year, with ~50 home runs to boot. He figures to get somewhere from 8-12 million in arbitration (my guess anyway) and his first 3 free agency years are going to be particularly valuable. He's 30, which means he basically has one chance to cash in on a long term deal. I wouldn't be surprised to see something in the range of 4 years, 50 million, assuming he is willing to sign longer term as opposed to play out next year and try to get a big FA deal.

The dilemma over Aaron Hill shows how the Jays are really paying the price for their weak farm system (or weak drafts) of the past few years.  Those drafts were strong in pitching, but weak in middle infielders.  There's just nobody in the system who is major-league ready at 2B or SS or 3B.  At best, the Jays could hope that A-Hech is ready by the middle or end of 2011, allowing Escobar to be shifted to 2B.  Or the Jays could hope that Brad Emaus makes a rapid improvement over the next 6 to 12 months.  But both of those are risky.  I can see the Jays probably giving Hill another half-season in a regular role, to see if he magically snaps out of it, since the alternatives are so inadequate.   But given Hill's poor numbers in 2010 and 2008 (albeit in a shortened season), it's starting to appear that his 2009 season was the outlier.

One reason for optimism:  Anthopolous has taken the bull by the horns and acquired two excellent young shortstops this year.  He's beginning to solve the middle-infield weakness in the Jays system.  If Hill fails to improve soon, I can see AA taking equally aggressive action to acquire a 2B.  I don't see AA ignoring this problem indefinitely.

One reason for optimism:  Anthopolous has taken the bull by the horns and acquired two excellent young shortstops this year.  He's beginning to solve the middle-infield weakness in the Jays system.  If Hill fails to improve soon, I can see AA taking equally aggressive action to acquire a 2B.  I don't see AA ignoring this problem indefinitely.

AA's managerial history seems to show that he is willing to be aggressive in improving the weakness of the team:
1) trading Halladay and eventually get Gose, D'Arnaud and Drabek
2) replacing Scutaro with Escobar and a draft pick
3) Sending Encarnacion to AAA and bring him back up.

All the above have brought positiveness to the team, so I would think he shall continue this trend in future.

Remember, though, Ricciardi was equally aggressive (if not more so!) during his first few years on the job. It's easy to be aggressive in changing a team you inherited; it's quite another thing to be aggressive in changing something you put together yourself.

I think saying that Emaus needs rapid improvement is a bit off China fan. He's no sure thing, and he wouldn't project to being a star, but I wouldn't hesitate to give him a shot at replacing Hill for injury or other reasons. I could see him being league average, and you could surely do worse as a stop-gap.

But given Hill's poor numbers in 2010 and 2008 (albeit in a shortened season), it's starting to appear that his 2009 season was the outlier.

No credit for 2007, eh? The season that was the best offensive performance ever by a Jays second baseman not named Alomar? The season where he had 400 more at-bats than the 'damning' 2008 season?

The dilemma over Aaron Hill shows how the Jays are really paying the price for their weak farm system (or weak drafts) of the past few years.

Does it? Are there teams out there that draft so successfully that they have a major-league ready player at every position in the minors? Are the Jays the only team out there that can't easily replace an 28 year-old signed to a reasonable contract a year after he was an All-Star?

Using Hechavarria as a solution just makes it look like you like Anthopoulos' moves because he's not JP. Hechavarria might turn into a very good player, but right now he looks like Rey Ordonez. There's not a whole lot separating him from Tyler Pastornicky.

.....I could see him (Emaus) being league average, and you could surely do worse as a stop-gap....

Anthopolous has clearly demonstrated that he doesn't want to settle for stop-gap or league average at any position.  As long as the Jays are chasing the Yankees, Red Sox and Rays, he can't afford to settle for stop-gaps.  I'm curious about Emaus too, and would like to see him getting a shot, but I don't see AA choosing Emaus as a long-term strategy unless he improves quite a bit.

....No credit for 2007?....

Good point about the 2007 season, but surely Hill's credit for 2007 (and even 2009) is diminishing rapidly. Nearly a full season of historically bad numbers will do that to a player.  Hill has already won the "comeback of the year" award once, but a betting man would not expect him to win it twice.

...Using Hechavarria as a solution just makes it look like you like Anthopoulos' moves because he's not JP....

I didn't actually say that Hechavarria is a definite solution -- I only said that this is a possibility, depending how he develops.  Personally I don't have strong opinions about AA vs JP at this stage -- it's too early to tell -- but there's a consensus among most analysts that AA has made a lot of good moves so far, and acquiring Hechavarria is almost certainly among his good moves, unless he has an unexpected setback in his development.

....Are there teams out there that draft so successfully that they have a major-league ready player at every position in the minors?

Again, I didn't actually say that the Jays should have a major-league ready player at "every" position.  I was noting that the Jays -- until this season -- didn't have anyone ready for SS or 2B or 3B.   That's three key positions in the infield, and there's really nobody (aside from Hechavarria now).  The fact that the Jays had to go out and sign 29-year-old Mike McCoy and 27-year-old Jarrett Hoffpauir in the offseason -- and place both of them on the 40-man roster -- is an indication of the weakness of the Jays farm system.  Until the Halladay trade, the Jays didn't have anyone ready for 1B or DH either, unless you're a big fan of Brian Dopirak.  Really, any honest assessment would suggest that the Jays farm system has been damaged by the disappointments of prospects such as Ahrens, Jackson and even Russ Adams if you go back a bit.  Sure, any team has disappointments in their system, but that's a lot of infield positions where nobody has really developed strongly.   I give full credit to Ricciardi for developing some brilliant pitchers. Now is maybe the time for AA to convert some of those pitchers into position players via trade.

I chose the word "historically" precisely because of Magpie's list, which shows that Hill is having the 10th-worst season of any 2B in the entire history of the Blue Jays franchise.  And as Magpie also pointed out, many of those with worse seasons were replaced before the end of the year. Hill will not be replaced this season, so he is near the very bottom for 2B who will play the full season.

I'm not panicking about Hill, merely pointing out that AA -- as a prudent GM -- must be considering his options for next season.  No prudent GM can simply hope for a rebound without a back-up plan.  He's got to be casting about for alternatives.  Or do you think that Anthopolous should simply accept all of those contract options to 2014 and assume that Hill will never repeat 2010 or 2008?

Just a further clarification:  if you look up the phrase "historically bad" in the dictionary, you'll find that is defined as:  "So bad that Magpie feels compelled to draw up a Data Chart of every 2B in Blue Jays history."

I could see him (Emaus) being league average,

Do you literally mean that? I think people throw around the term "league average" like it isn't such a big deal. If we use median for average, to simplify things, you are suggesting that Emaus could well be the 15th or 16th best second baseman in all of MLB. That's no small potatoes.

Now, if you mean he might be above replacement level, well that's another thing altogether, and perhaps more plausible.

Chinafan for the most part I disagree with your contention that the Jays are now paying the price for poor drafting at SS and second base. They have drafted poorly, but they haven't suffered very much recently. For the past two years they've been fine at SS and, with Escobar, are fine for the foreseeable future or until Hechevarria makes him expendable or an asset at another position. For most of Hill's career the Jays have not suffered at 2B. You can't help but be disappointed about Hill's season and worry about next year, but I think you have to put a little faith in the larger context of his entire pro career. His first five pro seasons were stellar and showed steady improvement; his 09 recovery and power surge were not that surprising given what he had done through 2007. He showed a bit of power in the minors and predictable power growth at the right age in the Majors. He certainly has (or had) the swing and body type to be a 25-30 HR .800 OPS guy. When you have a 27 year old 5.4 WAR player locked up through 2014, ML ready depth at that position is a minor problem compared to the needs at other positions. Emaus is close to being a ML ready prospect in any event and before this season played 2B, which is probably a better fit for his bat as well.

AA inherited a system full of holes but he's dealing with it the best way, by focusing first on up-the-middle prospects from catcher to CF. He added D'Arnaud and signed Nessy. He added Drabek and went heavy on pitchers in the draft. He signed Hechevarria, traded for Escobar and drafted a tough signing in Thon. He traded for Gose. The Jays are deep in prospects at catcher, pitcher and now, with Mastroianni, the addition of Gose and Marisnick off to a promising start, at CF. They have a talented young SS and an elite prospect behind him. At some point they can use that depth up the middle to fill  bigger but easier filled holes at the infield and outfield corners.

I'd love to see the Jays go after Brett Lawrie, who is playing 2B but has all the tools to be an excellent ML third baseman. Considering how persistent AA was in going after Gose, it wouldn't surprise me in the least to see him eventually get Lawrie, too.  It would give them a number of infield options whether or not Hill continues to struggle. But given what he's done over the majority of his eight pro seasons, I think it's much more likely Hill bounces back next year to something closer to his 09 season than a repeat of this year's debacle.

As I've said before, I think AA wants only guys who are in the top 1/3rd of the majors - ie: top 10 at their position, ideally top 5. Why? Because that is what you need at a lot of positions to win 95 a year.

Starting pitchers are a bit different as there are 5 slots per team so top 1/3rd would be top 50 - but you need at least one who could be top 10, another top 20, another top 30, another top 40 and finally a top 50.

So, who do the Jays have who could be viewed that way? Checking dollar value at FanGraphs (easiest way I could think of) with a 250 PA minimum...
CA: Buck: #9
1B: Overbay: #18
2B: Hill: #30
3B: Encarnacion: #23 (Bautista is listed at #4)
SS: Escobar: #12 (full season) A-Gon is at #4 for full season but since the trade Escobar is 300k ahead.
LF: Lewis: #22
CF: Wells: #9 (Rios #10)
RF: Bautista: #2
DH: Lind: 2nd from bottom worth negative $1.9 so far

Of note: For 2009 Lind was #1 among DH's, Hill #7 at 2B, Escobar #5 at SS, Snider doesn't have enough PA's

Not a perfect method of course, but it does put reality checks in place doesn't it?

Clearly Overbay, Encarnacion, and Lewis need to be replaced. Buck's peak is barely top 10. Hill's best is top 10 but not a top 5 so replacing him is reasonable to look at but not a priority until the other holes are covered.

For the rotation (50+ IP - 160 qualify)...
Romero: #15
Morrow: #25
Marcum: #46
Cecil: #61
If we still had Halladay (#1 overall) then we'd have almost exactly what I said we needed.

For relievers (20+ IP)...
Downs: #44 (just $3.7 mil)
Frasor: #54 (ahead of Papelbon)
Gregg: #65 (no bonus for saves I guess)
Janssen: #76 (still $2 mil)
Camp: #109
Purcey: #118
Tallet: #223 of 223 (negative $5.6 million) or #200 of 201 starters with 20+ IP (Ryan Rowland-Smith of the Mariners is worse).

So the pen is really not that good based on FanGraphs methods (should have 7 in top 70 ideally instead of 3). However, their methodology is weak in the pen imo as Rivera is worth only $5.9 (#12) which is far lower than most would put him.

Still, again, this is a good reality check.

The Jays hopefully are doing similar checks (but with stronger methods) and know that only a handful of guys right now are top 10 at their position and thus need to be replaced ASAP if you want 95+ wins. If 80+ was the goal (aka NL Central) then top 20 would be fine, top 15 ideal. However, here in the AL East you need killer players everywhere as you face the NY 'All-Star' Yankees plus the Tampa Bay 'kid' Rays and Boston 'little brother syndrome' Red Sox.

I would think that the 10th worst season out of less than 40 does not classify as "historically" bad. He has an OPS of 80, which is not great but is much closer to the median than the bottom 3 or 4.

And the upside to the weakness among position players is that the Jays have lots of pitching. You will never be able to build an entire club from scratch, especially if you also want to win a few games along the way (as the Jays did over the past few years). And you also don't need a superstar at every position. Having a middle infielder with an OPS of 80-90 is not the end of the world. Take a look at recent world series roster, they almost always have a weakness somewhere.

True dat, Moe. I mean, seriously, name even a World Series champ that didn't have a glaring weakness. The 1998-2000 Yankees, maybe? The 1975-76 Reds, though their starting rotation was nothing short of ordinary. The 1984 Tigers? Flukey greatness for a real good team. Those are the three best teams of my lifetime, I think. Anyone else have ANY examples?

No, it's not the end of the world to have a weakness somewhere, but when you're in the Jays' position, I do think you have to aspire to the superstar-at-every-position scheme. You can't be satisfied if there's a weakness anywhere. I think that was Ricciardi's trouble--he committed himself mentally to too many players who weren't great but he figured they were good enough.

What about those great WS winners - what dud's did they have?

1993: OPS+ sub 100: Borders (75), Sprague (86), Henderson (83). No bench player had a 100+ OPS+ outside of Domingo Martinez who had a 121 in just 15 PA's. 3 guys in the rotation had ERA+'s sub-100 over 25+ starts (Stottlemyre, Stewart, and Morris).

1992: OPS+ sub 100: Borders (85), Lee (83), Gruber (72), White (90). But also had on the bench Kent (regular at 3B till traded, 109) but no others over 100 over more than 35 PA's (33 PA for Turner Ward at 167). Geez did 3B suck those 2 years outside of Jeff Kent.

Staff had 3 out of 6 with 10+ starts sub-100 (Stottlemyre, Stieb, Wells) Boy was Cone needed eh (7 starts 162 ERA+)? Of course having Henke/Ward as your closer/setup helps fix a lot of things.

1985: 99 wins, just 2 sub-100 OPS+ in Fernandez (97) and Garcia (82 at 2B). A few sinkholes on the bench though in Martinez (48), Matuszek (55 LH DH), Oliver (76 LH DH), Johnson (81 RH DH), Thornton (58 OF) and Lee (20 SS - his age and OPS+ matched - add together and you get his AB's).

The rotation only had one sinkhole in Leal (75 ERA+) who was dumped after 14 starts, replaced by Filer (111 over 9) and Davis (122 over 5). Wow. 130 team ERA+ no wonder they won 99.

People are getting caught up in semantics all throughout this thread.
i said i "COULD see Emaus being league average". Doesn't mean I think he will. I still think his skill set and numbers - qualfied by my lack of experience in scouting and never having seen him play - would make him a useful contributor with less than star upside.
as for stop gaps, he's probably about as ready a replacement that is not a potential star is going to be.
whether  AA thinks his upside is high enough to warrant giving a chance is not relevant to my point, which is with a properly constructed roster you could trade a Hill and whatever for a star, throw Emaus at 2b and have a net gain. Emaus then becomes a suitable "stop-gap" until you can find an upgrade.

I suppose I should have elaborated in my original post... but whatever.
 I still disagree.

Tom Waits couldn't find his waitress with a geiger counter. Gaston seems to be similarly burdened finding Travis Snider. Maybe GoogleMaps would help.

Maybe. He's in the neighbourhood, I'm sure.

Is Emaus correctly pronounced e-mouse?

I agree with the concern, and also optimism posted here about Aaron Hill.  All these stats posted here are great, but no-one has mentioned why Hill is having such a terrible season.

Does he need glasses / lasik surgery?
Is he hiding an injury?
Has his swing declined (gotten long and loopy, or too much uppercut?)?
Is he out of shape, and doing an early Raul Mondesi?
Have pitchers suddenly figured him out after several years of success?
Has he somehow lost bat-speed?
Is he suffering some mental issues, unable to focus or 'trying too hard'?

After patiently waiting for him to improve from his slow start this season, I'm becoming somewhat frustrated.  For some reason I believe that we (including myself) have cut him (and Lind, who has somewhat recovered) more slack than we did for Wells and RIos last year.  Why, I'm not sure but this is my perception.  Perhaps I believed that Hill is more intelligent than Rios, for example and thus able to solve his issues?

I assume that Hill's pride, competitiveness, work ethic and perceived intelligence ensure that he is doing the right things to get back to his previous performance levels, but am really wondering why it's taking so long.  With the resources available to him (coach Murphy, Cito, video tape, peer feedback, proper nutrition and exercise, team therapists etc), what's the problem?

I know I'm being somewhat glib and simplifying the act of hitting MLB pitching which is one of the most difficult things to do in sports, but I need ANSWERS!!!  Or at least plausible theories :)

As I've said before, I think AA wants only guys who are in the top 1/3rd of the majors - ie: top 10 at their position, ideally top 5. Why? Because that is what you need at a lot of positions to win 95 a year.

Well, of course he wants top 10 guys at all positions - but I can't agree that you need a lot of these guys to win 95.  Based on current season performance, Tampa Bay has mediocre players at SS, CF, RF, DH and 1B.  San Diego has Gonzalez and a whole lot of nothing on offense.  Texas has holes at Catcher, 1B and CF.  Atlanta starts Ankiel and Cabrera, Cinci also has a weak OF, Minnesota has been playing the Nick Puntos of the world at 3b for what seems like forever ...

Hill has hit every full year of his pro career outside of this one, and has a tremendously team-favorable contract (thanks again, AA) if he can't bounce back.  A platoon of Lewis and the Maestro could be league average.  If Lind's bat recovers at 1b and Butterfield can help his glove, and with Snider rotating through LF and RF, our only clear weakness for next year is 3B.  The rotation looks strong and our bullpen will be fine with all the young pitching talent.  Not bad at all for a team that seems to be building for a run in 2012. 

our only clear weakness for next year is 3B.

Not offensively. If he had qualifying at bats, EE's OPS would rank 12th among all major league 3B right now. lop off his first 4 games and he'd be n the top 10.

Narrow that to just the AL, and his OPS is...fifth.

if the definition of having a good player at a position is top five among his peers in the league, then EE qualifies (offensively).

Do you literally mean that? I think people throw around the term "league average" like it isn't such a big deal. If we use median for average, to simplify things, you are suggesting that Emaus could well be the 15th or 16th best second baseman in all of MLB. That's no small potatoes.

Of the 15 AL 2B who have at least 250 plate appearances, the median guy (Sean Rodriguez) has the following line:

.263 - .310 - .415 - .725

He has 18 doubles, 8 homers, and 9 steals and projects to around 30/13/15 on a full season.

do I think Emaus could be that good?

without a doubt that is well within his grasp.

#5 on the list is Orlando Hudson and his slash lines are .284/.360/.403/.762

I'd suggest that THIS is likely somewhere around where Emaus' ceiling lies.


All of MLB?

33 guys, median guy is Howie Kendrick at #17 - his OPS is.738

Narrow it down to guys with 400 PA...

You get 15 guys (i.e. half as many as there are MLB teams) and Hudson is median with his .762 at #7, #8 is Jeff keppinger (.743) and #9 in Kendricks.

Am I telling you Emaus could be at least a Jeff Keppinger? (career OPS .728)? That conclusion seems so obvious no one should even have to say it.

could he be a Howie Kendrick? (career OPS .756)? Seems perfectly reasonable.

Orlando Hudson (.777)?  Not insane.

to specifically referance the last quoted sentence above - the 115th best qualifying 2B in MLB in 2010 is Chone Figgins - his OPS is .629

If you expand that generously to everyone with at least 300 PA, the 15th guy is Kendrick.

So, all that to say, yeah, there's no real reason to assume Emaus couldn't be a league average 2B. I'm guessing probably you have an inflated idea of who a league average 2B actually produces.

And not unreasonably. Look around at the other 2Bmen in the AL East: Hill, even in a good year, is nowhere near the best of Cano, Pedroia, Zobrist, and Roberts. It's silly, really; why should there be all these good second basemen all of a sudden? It's like the early '90s, when there was, hold on, Alomar, Baerga, DeShields, um...  I know there were one or two other guys... Jose Lind, if all you cared about was defense...

So EE's biggest asset (his bat) in his best offensive year is still just 12th in the majors, 5th out of 14 in the AL. Before factoring in that his defense has always been poor to horrid with a peak of average. He is what JP and Ash always wanted - middle of the pack overall skill set, career year makes him look good but not great.

To win 95 and be a consistent contender you can't be satisfied with a guy who can be top 10 in a peak year. You need to look for guys who are top 10 in an average year. And that is top 10 overall, not just with one half of his game.

I've been an EE defender at times, but after checking out the quality at third base I can see that he is no long term solution, just a placeholder until AA can find a high end third baseman. Guys like EE (and Overbay for that matter) are good to have as long as you understand that placeholder status is all they should have. As soon as someone with potential to be top 10 consistently shows up you put them in without hesitation. Do not sign mediocre players to long term deals, do not count on them as solutions - they are not in the AL East (NL Central, sure but not AL East).

Craig Biggio, Matthew!

BIlly Doran. Julio Franco, who was only about 37 by then ...

No, there was one other guy who was supposed to be one of the great young second basemen (and then it didn't work out). Who was it? I'll have to go look it up. Barberie? I don't think it was Barberie.

Depends how one measures EE's offense for 'best year'...

• WAR batting is 1.4 so far, vs previous peak of 0.7 in 2008/2006.
• OPS+ is #3 vs 2006/2008's 108 each
• OBP is his worst (#6 out of 6)
• Slg is #3 for him (2006/2008)
• FanGraph's Batting Value is #4 at 1.5 (2006/2008/2007 all were 6.4 or higher).

I guess you were using FanGraph's. Interesting though to look at the different systems and see such a spread. Seems that FanGraphs isn't factoring in as strong a park factor as Baseball Reference.

I was going by OPS+ on BB-Ref and recognizing that OPS+ undervalues OBP. Thus I rated Encarnacion's 2007 line of .289/.356/.438 for a 101 OPS+ (556 PA) as a better season than his current .241/.307/.447 for a 105 OPS+ (296 PA).

I take it you're going by WAR, and I'm realizing I don't know WAR very well. It must be giving him a huge hit on defence to rate his 2010 better than his 2006-2008.

 

I've been an EE defender at times, but after checking out the quality at third base I can see that he is no long term solution, just a placeholder until AA can find a high end third baseman. Guys like EE (and Overbay for that matter) are good to have as long as you understand that placeholder status is all they should have. As soon as someone with potential to be top 10 consistently shows up you put them in without hesitation. Do not sign mediocre players to long term deals, do not count on them as solutions - they are not in the AL East (NL Central, sure but not AL East).

I certainly don't disagree here.

With the caveat that pretty much every playoff teams has a couple of guys like that in the starting lineup.

People are defending Hill and Encarnacion by saying "every winning team has a couple of weak players."  But that's missing the point.  The point is this:  the Jays in 2010 are mediocre (i.e. average or worse) at almost every offensive position, and there is no guarantee that these players will improve in 2011.  A team can carry a couple of weak players, but it needs more than mediocrity at most positions.

Looking up and down the lineup analytically, as John helpfully did in this thread, shows that the Jays have only three hitters who rank in the top 10 in their position this year:  Bautista, Wells and Buck.  (And you can include Escobar if you include only his Jays numbers.)  Wells and Buck are only marginally in the top 10, and Buck might be gone next season, so that really leaves only Bautista as clearly among the best at his position as 2011 approaches.  This means that the Jays are carrying five players who -- based on their 2010 numbers -- are average or worse.  Those five are Hill, Lind, Encarnacion, Overbay and Snider.  We can assume that Snider and Hill will probably improve next season, and maybe Lind, but will they move into the top 10 at their position?  Far from certain.  And others such as Wells, Bautista and Buck (or JPA) might be worse next season.

Bottom line:  I would argue that AA needs to acquire some hitters in the off-season, by trade or free agency.  Otherwise there's a distinct chance that the Jays will be mediocre (i.e. average or worse) at 5 or 6 or even 7 positions in the lineup next season.  Which would be a good way to waste all those impressive pitching performances that all of us have been marveling over.

In fact, let me venture a plausible scenario for the Jays hitters in 2011, based on their 2010 numbers and other factors, assuming that AA does not acquire any new hitters.  (This is not necessarily a prediction, just a reasonable scenario that has a fair chance of happening.)  I think it's plausible that the Jays next season could be average (or worse) at the following positions:  catcher, first base, second base, third base, centre field, left field, designated hitter.  That's 7 of the 9 positions.  Now, of course there will be a couple of surprises -- young players who improve dramatically or veterans who bounce back surprisingly.  Maybe JPA will have a great rookie season, or maybe Hill or Lind will revert to their 2009 numbers, or maybe Snider will achieve a breakthrough despite his raw youth.  So, let's assume that 2 of those players (Hill, Lind, Snider, JPA) are better than average next season -- and that's probably the maximum, because we can't assume that everyone will achieve at their peak potential in 2011.  So the Jays would still be left with mediocrity at 5 of the 9 offensive positions.  In my view, that leaves the Jays in the middle of the pack again, and I don't see where the rebuilding would be happening.  Now, if AA can acquire two above-average hitters in the off-season, by trade or free agency, suddenly the Jays could -- perhaps -- be above-average at 6 of the 9 positions -- and they could even have a chance at contending, if the pitching stays strong.  This must be fairly clear to AA as well, and I hope he follows that path.

Well, it depends on how you view some of the guys.

The Jays have guys (right now) who in 2009 or 2010 ranked in the top 10 at their position at...
CA, 2B, SS, CF, RF, DH
Leaving headaches at...
1B, 3B, LF

All 3 have placeholder guys - they shouldn't embarrass but won't win fans either.

So, where to focus upgrades?

CA is a free agent, but JPA looks like he should be a similar player - worth upgrading but only for a top 5 guy.

1B is also a free agent, well worth upgrading but no prospects near majors unless Lind goes there in which case who is the DH?

2B is signed for 2011 and has options for 2012/2013/2014 (must decide this winter on 2014 option, next on 2012/2013 if no to 2014). His peak is top 10, more likely is middle of road thus also a placeholder and worth upgrading but not a priority upgrade (unlike 1B)

3B is in arbitration for 2011. Pure placeholder, but again no one quite ready but there is a hot prospect who is close. Escobar & Hill are not solutions as neither hits enough to be a top 10 guy at third.

SS is set if you assume his 1/2 half in Atlanta was the oddity. I'd look at signing long term with a plan to shift to 2B once the $10 million Cuban is ready.

LF has Snider who has been a top prospect but 2011 is his last chance imo to show he isn't a mediocre player. His K's have to come down or power going up. He could be a top 10 or a bottom 10, 2011 will tell.

CF has Wells who is here until 2014. He can be a top 3 in CF if all is going well, but I'd say #8-12 is his likely landing place.

RF has Bautista who is a wild card. He is amazing this year, but what will he be like next? Will he be a top 5 guy in RF or a super-sub?

DH... Lind is tough. He had 2 horrid months in May/June but otherwise has been solid. He is signed so he is here no matter what, be it at 1B or DH or even LF.

So, locked in are DH/CF/2B/SS/RF due to contracts (or arbitration) in 2011 and shown ability to be top 10. 1B/CA are free agents thus easy to change. 3B might be a non-tender possibility but odds are he'll stick unless a really good player comes available (ala Escobar) and might be dumped mid-season. LF is a kid who can either be great or pull an Alex Gonzalez the First trick (ie: no growth from early promise at a young age). Lewis is a low end placeholder who won't be here long term.

Hill is the toughest decision this winter for AA. He is a solid middle of the pack 2B who can peak in top 10 territory. Do you use those 3 options or wait and see? Then comes the free agent positions and third base. Lots to do for AA this winter!

Meant to say, in the penultimate sentence of my last post, that the Jays in that optimistic scenario could be above-average at 7 of the 9 lineup positions.  (Yeah, 5 plus 2 is obviously not 6.)  Anyway, it's all just scenarios, but I think Anthopolous has got to be planning an upgrade at a couple of positions in the off-season.  There's not much coming up through the Jays system for 2011, aside from catcher and pitchers, and free agency is probably not the best route at this point.  Anthopolous wants young controllable players with high upside.  So the upgrades will have to be done by trades -- which means converting young pitchers into young hitters.

LF has Snider who has been a top prospect but 2011 is his last chance imo to show he isn't a mediocre player.

Snider has put up an OPS+ of 103 in basically one full year's worth of at-bats from ages 20-22, ages where most players are still in the minors. I have seen no reason to not still be bullish on this man's future.

they should break the bank to get adrian beltre as a free agent-gold glove at third- bring back lyle overbay and give the ball to drabek as a the 5th starter -arencibia at catcher - worse teams have contended -go jays

willrain said:  Could he (Emaus) be a Howie Kendrick? (career OPS .756)? Seems perfectly reasonable.

Will, I like Emaus as a prospect but gosh, to me that seems perfectly unreasonable. Kendrick was a minor league batting stud at all levels and put up much better numbers then Emaus at a younger age at each stage. Over 1.000 OPS at 21 years old split between High A and AA; over 1.000 OPS at 22 years old in the PCL. Great glove too, .987 career field pct in the Majors.

Pretty much the same situation with Rodriguez, better numbers at a younger age across the board and a much higher ceiling as a bigger and better athlete. Rodriguez had back-to-back plus 1.000 seasons in the PCL and hit 50 HRs.

Hudson's offensive numbers track closer for an Emaus comparison but he was more consistent in the minors, put up numbers in the IL that project much more easily to the Majors than Vegas numbers, and you're also talking about a four-time Gold Glove winner. Emaus generally gets good marks for his glove but he has struggled at 3B this year.

Comparisons to Keppinger or perhaps Mark Ellis are pretty consistent to their minor league performances and seem much more realistic. Jed Lowrie is another pretty good comparable although his Minor League numbers were slightly better. Overall, 2B is a very strong position in the Majors and I don't see Emaus fitting in anywhere close to the median (as defined by Kendrick, which IMO undervalues Kendrick). But if Emaus is as good as Lowrie that would be fine by me and make him a very useful guy for the Jays.

My trouble with Snider is an old study I did (can't find it right now) which showed most players, once they establish a level in OPS will only exceed it by 20% as a peak level. If Snider is a 760 OPS level and only climbs by 20% then his peak will be 912 (great) but he'll be a 110 OPS normally which isn't enough from a guy in LF/RF for a 95 win team.

Now, if he establishes a 900 OPS as his norm, then he'd be great. That is what 2011 will show us - imo.

Even if that study was true (which I doubt) how would one know what level of OPS Snider has established? He has not been given a fair shake yet in the majors and right now is getting maybe 60% of the at bats he should be getting as a full time player. He has been around 3 years, but he has been bounced from minors to majors so many times in that period. His peripherals if you look at them (or have read about them in the past at places like Fangraphs) are outstanding. He has an immense line drive rate and a good walk rate. His problems too start this year was bad luck on BABIP. His BABIP was very low for a guy who was hitting line drives like he has been.

Now since getting back from injury it is possible that his wrist isn't fully right yet, but he is still showing patience, drawing walks and has hit for some power. And remember this is in playing time that is extremely inconsistent. Now sure maybe he won't turn out to be what we think he will be, but at 22 it is way too early to write him off. He's not even been given a fair chance yet. We won't know what Snider will be until he is actually given a chance to play every day. Something that Lind, Hill and others on this team have been given.

Kendrick was a minor league batting stud at all levels and put up much better numbers then Emaus at a younger age at each stage. Over 1.000 OPS at 21 years old split between High A and AA; over 1.000 OPS at 22 years old in the PCL.

Does that mean Emaus can't put up a .756 OPS in the pros or that Kendrick has underperformed his projection?

To elaborate, Snider right now has a line drive rate of 25.4%. Typical BABIP on LD's is something like .650 to .750. But this year Snider has a career low BABIP. He has a decent fly ball rate and hits ground balls about 40% of the time. He has been extremely unlucky. In the majors there are two players who have better (or equal) LD rates to him. James Loney and Austin Jackson. If you look at Snider's splits between flies/LDs/ground balls right now Snider actually looks very similar to Joe Mauer. Snider has shown he can play pretty well in the field. (compared to Lewis anyway) He has a good arm and can play both corners. He has just been very very unlucky. Compare this to Jackson who has been very very lucky. The point is Snider's periperhals and numbers are pointing to a major breakout very soon. Now I (and many others) believe this would happen more readily if he was given a more stable spot in the lineup and regular playing time. As he gets more playing time his luck will return to normal and his numbers will climb.

Now compare this to someone like Hill, who right now has the lowest line drive rate of anyone in the majors by far. This is shown by the extreme number of popups he is hitting. Hill's problems might not be fixable, which is why people should be worried about him if he doesn't return to his line driving ways. I read he bulked off this offseason, probably in response to last year's performance and trying to reproduce his power numbers then. I think Lind will rebound next year, perhaps not to his 2009 levels, but back to 110+ OPS anyway.

Does that mean Emaus can't put up a .756 OPS in the pros or that Kendrick has underperformed his projection?

There's no question Kendrick has underperformed everyone's projections, but injuries have been a big part of that. Kendrick is just 27, let's see where his OPS goes in the next 3-4 years. He does contribute more to the Angels than a reliable .300 career bat and that's no small thing.  With Emaus I'm just trying to be realistic with expectations. Countless guys with better minor careers than his have failed to become ML starters.  Emaus could be a .750 OPS guy in the Majors, who knows. His good eye at the plate is reason for optimism but I look at Vegas as a Performance Enhancing Destination. Hard to tell what he'll do when he gets LV out of his system. He's not even playing 2B right now so it just further muddies things. I think he projects as a good utility infielder with a decent line drive bat. If he's better than that, great.

Emaus could be a .750 OPS guy in the Majors, who knows.

Then I  think you're in agreement with Will.  Will was never suggesting that Emaus had Kendrick's upside.

People are defending Hill and Encarnacion by saying "every winning team has a couple of weak players."  But that's missing the point.  The point is this:  the Jays in 2010 are mediocre (i.e. average or worse) at almost every offensive position, and there is no guarantee that these players will improve in 2011.  A team can carry a couple of weak players, but it needs more than mediocrity at most positions.

The point is, I think, that there are players that you can project upside for (that Lind and Hill return to form, that Snider becomes a star, that Esco hits like 2009 (or better) and so forth) but that even those projections have to acknwledge there are others in the starting line-up that one can't rationally make that case for - EE in particular.

OBVIOUSLY if, for instance, Lind, Esco, Hill, and Snider DON'T reach their projected levels, then the question becomes moot. You have to take things in context i think.

We can assume that Snider and Hill will probably improve next season, and maybe Lind, but will they move into the top 10 at their position?

Nothing is guaranteed. No one say this year's Hill, Esco and Lind coming, no one saw Hill's 2010 coming.

BUT, in the context of their whole career, I think one can say with a high degree of confidence that Lind will rank very highly among DHs since only 2 DHs in 2010 have an OPS of at least .900 currently. Of the six hitters in front of him, Luke Scott is the youngest at 32 and a few are geriatric in baseball terms.

Of all qualifying left fielders (if we could snider as a left fielder) the second ranked hitter by OPS (Delmon Young) comes in at .839 - i have every confidence Snider can top that as early as next year - .790 would rank him 4th right now.

at 2B, there are only six qualifiers in the AL, and Hill is fifth among them, but in order to be #2 he'd only need to reach .760 and given that his career OPS is .755 that's not a huge moutain to climb.

But lets expand it until we at least get as many second basemen as teams. You have to drop down to 275 plate appearances to get that. On this list, you need a .790 OPS to be ranked 5th. Again, I'm not shy about suggesting Hill can be in that neighborhood in a normal year. Kinsler is third at .805 and Hill probably can't go much more than that even in a great year (.829 in '10 is prob right around his ceiling).

Doing that with LF gets you 14 guys with at least 200 PA, Snider's .755 would rank 8th if he had that many (I'm kinda stunned he doesn't) and even lewis ranks fifth. Still, Young's .839 is second only to Hamilton.

At DH, Thome joins the .900+ club (another geriatric) but otherwise, nothing much changes - if Lind's OPS was even .853 (well off his '09 performance) he'd be 4th on the list.

Wells is second among CFs

If Escobar reached .800, he'd be #1 against this year's class - As little as .730 would still be #3

V-Mart is sixth among catchers with .767 - Napoli is 4th at .802...that's probably a decent range to expect JPA to fall into.

Bautista, actually, is the place where pessimisim might well arise. It wouldn't be shocking at all for him to drop off 100 points of OPS...but even if he did he'd still be around #2 on the current list. Ordonez is fifth at .852 so it's reasonable a major regression could still leave him in the top five.

That's six positions with credible chances at the top 10, and one not far outside (JPA being the hardest to predict)

A 3B with an OPS of .820 would be third this year, EE is sixth (speaking only of offense) - the presumably departing Overbay is 10th, but 1B is the hardest position to crack the top 5, Tex is fifth with an OPS of .860, but the top 4 are at .972 or better and that's where Tex usually lives so short of trading for fielder or something, we probably are not going to place a 1B that high


still and all, I think you are underestimating the Jays, or overestimating what it takes to be highly ranked (you said top 10, but i used top 5)

Otherwise there's a distinct chance that the Jays will be mediocre (i.e. average or worse) at 5 or 6 or even 7 positions in the lineup next season.

there's always a chance, but I'd be MUCH more comfortable betting that at least 6 positions will be top 5 in the AL than i would that at least six would be below the league median at their position.

In fact, let me venture a plausible scenario for the Jays hitters in 2011, based on their 2010 numbers and other factors,

Therein lies your problem. if you had predicted Hill Bautista, Wells, Escobar, and Lind  for 2010 based on 2009, how wrong would you be right now?

Snider has put up an OPS+ of 103 in basically one full year's worth of at-bats from ages 20-22, ages where most players are still in the minors. I have seen no reason to not still be bullish on this man's future.

Indeed. I find it shocking anyone would consider 2011 his "last chance"

Will, I like Emaus as a prospect but gosh, to me that seems perfectly unreasonable. Kendrick was...

I was speaking of what Kendrick is doing THIS year in the context of what constituted "league average" - just pulling out the OPS of the guys at or near the median. Not arguing Emaus was a guy with Kendrick's upside. If i have to analize it, I'd sggest kendrick is underpreforming - but the point was the number, it just happened to be Kendrick who holds it.

Hudson's offensive numbers track closer for an Emaus comparison but he was more consistent in the minors, put up numbers in the IL that project much more easily to the Majors than Vegas numbers, and you're also talking about a four-time Gold Glove winner. Emaus generally gets good marks for his glove but he has struggled at 3B this year.

I think that (speaking offensively) that Hudson's career is right around what I'd guess to be Emaus' ceiling. I would guess he ends up somewhere between Keppinger and Hudson (given he doesn't have Hudson's glove holding on to a starting spot with that bat is much more tenious) which is not enough for anything other than a stopgap at 3B unless you have a great offense elsewhere and he fits your lineup as a #2 hitter...but would be on the high end enough offense for a league average 2B most years.

Overall, 2B is a very strong position in the Majors and I don't see Emaus fitting in anywhere close to the median

3 AL 2B have an OPS of at least .800, it's true there are 10 in the majors but I don't think how strong a position is in the NL has a lot of bearing on how well a team competes in the AL. Still, Hudson (.762 now) is 13th in the majors.Fontenot (.733) is 18th so that's the range for "league average" and it's not an unreasonable neighborhood for Emaus. The median is .745

Then I  think you're in agreement with Will.  Will was never suggesting that Emaus had Kendrick's upside.

Bingo.