Don't forget that the Jays released Bob MacDonald, a somewhat useful reliever, the same day as they released David Wells. (I think the Derek Bell-Darrin Jackson trade was the day before, although I could be wrong.) I remember thinking that this is what winning a World Series does to you: it makes you arrogant enough to think you can do whatever you want and it won't matter.

You do have to remember that the Jays had 3 great position prospects at this time- Delgado, Gonzalez and Green.  Originally, the idea probably was that they would be the catcher, shortstop and corner outfielder to join Alomar, Olerud, Sprague, Carter and White.  Behind the plate, they also had Randy Knorr. 

In time, Delgado and Green became very good to great players and Gonzalez became a very useful player (although he did not develop as anyone had hoped).  Unfortunately, the interim planning was not done as well as it should have been.  Dick Schofield and Pat Borders were not good enough to be given large roles at that point, and with Sprague taking a step backwards, you had three big holes in the line-up.

Fortunately for the '93 team, Schofield would get hurt and Gillick would respond by making the best trade in Jays history.

Bob Macdonald was actually sold to the Tigers, not that it helps much. Still, he didn't do much after (121 games in relief with a 88 ERA+) or before (76 games over 3 seasons, 121 ERA+). He was useful and I should've included him above given some of the guys I listed.

Mike, good point about how the Jays were hyped about Delgado/Green/Gonzalez at the time. This shows why AA's method of getting the best guys at the premium positions is vital. Sometimes guys don't make it, sometimes they do but you need backups and if they are a CA/SS/CF they can move to many other positions if needed (CA to 1B/3B/LF/RF depending on skill set, SS to anywhere but CA, CF to LF/RF).

Sprague taking a step backwards,

Not really. He was never very good. But when you win a WS with a guy, he looks a whole lot better than he really is. You don't regard him as a problem, as someone you need to improve on. So you go forward with a third baseman who's below average offensively and worse than that defensively...

Subjectively, Sprague looked about ten miles better than Kelly Gruber had looked the year before. In 1992, Gruber conveyed the impression that he had completely forgotten everything he ever knew about how to play baseball and was just hoping not to make too big a fool of himself out there. As ordinary as Sprague was, he was obviously possessed of a basic competence which was quite refreshing, and I think that's why he kept his job for as long as he did. It was just such a relief having him out there after Gruber's high-wire act.

Gruber subsequently claimed he played hurt in 1992.  Upper-back/neck problems that he and the team kept quiet about.  He did miss 40 games that year and was out of the majors by the age of 31.  Wasn't there a report that someone spotted Gruber water-skiing while he was on the DL around that time?

In the end it was proven Gruber was hurt, seriously hurt.

Via Wikipedia...
Kelly's career was cut short in 1993 due to a bone spur on his spine. He played 63 games for the Angels. Due to growing threats of paralysis, Kelly had surgery performed on the bone spur that ended his career in 1993. The surgery was successful.

I'd say that is a pretty good reason for not playing at your best. When he was on the field Gruber would play full out as I recall, but the macho image of sports forced him to look like a wimp for taking care of an injury that wasn't visible.

Here's a neat visualization of the dismantling:
http://www.flipflopflyin.com/flipflopflyball/info-9293bluejays.html

What isn’t being taken into adequate acount here is money, and changing ownership.   The Jays had been big spenders in 1992 and 1993.  But a new management had taken over at Labatt Brewing (just after WS win number 1?).  The company invested heavily in Europe, Mexico, the U.S.   But Mexico’s currency went sour, and Labatt lost bigtime.   Things--lots of things-- had to be sold .  It was truly a mess.  The new CEO was not a winner.  It was not at all like the good old days.  So all these reductions and losses, and all the apparent aimlessness being cited here, has as much to do with ownership as anything else.   A cautionary tale.

As per Matthew E - we got a half season of Tony Fernandez back for Darrin Jackson, so Derek Bell->DJ->TF was actually not such a bad thing (in context).. Then we lost TF to free agency..

Anyone know how many other players out there (lots, some, few?) have had FOUR tours of duty with the same team, as Tony did with the Jays?

vw fan,
i dunno, but Billy Martin would have to manage that team.

The Belgian brewer Interbrew (now InBev) bought Labatt'sin 1995, IIRC. To this day, I refuse to drink Stella Artois. Vile pisswasser. Chimay is much tastier.

However, despite the ownership issues, I do think Ash is to blame for the Jays time in the wilderness. Without a doubt, JP has followed the campsite rule and left the team in a better state than he found it.

Gruber's carer didn't end in 1993. He came back in 1997 (age 35) to play 2b for Rochester (AAA) for part of the season.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/minors/player.cgi?id=gruber001kel

 

I share your views about the beers, Chris; but the real troubles with the company started long before Interbrew finally stepped up to buy it in 1995.   The company seems to me to have been pretty much a rudderless ship for a good while.   I’m not trying to defend Gord Ash.  I don’t miss him.  I’m just saying that, given the state of the company in 1994/95,  I don’t know who could have made a success of the team.   Baseball was scarcely on their (Labatt’s) radar, it seems.  It's an interesting story; and I only know a tiny bit about it.  There are probably other bauxites who know far more than I do about the matter.

Baseball was scarcely on their (Labatt’s) radar, it seems. It's an interesting story; and I only know a tiny bit about it. There are probably other bauxites who know far more than I do about the matter.

I suspect 'other' is a polite euphemism for older in this circumstance, and I fit that bill for sure. After Interbrew bought Labatt's, it made clear from the outset that it did not want to own or fund the ballteam. The most difficult element was that it would not pay the price for draft picks, and Ash and Wilken had to draft below slot money. Vernon Wells, for example, was laughed at as an overdraft, because he would sign cheap. When Rogers finally bought the team there was a sigh of relief.

The Belgian brewer Interbrew (now InBev) bought Labatt's in 1995, IIRC.

Correct, the salary cut didn't happen until the 1996 roster was assembled. And that was just one season. Every other year from 1992 to 2000 the salary was in the 40's.

Looking at the better FA players allowed to leave each year, and comparing that to imported players...

'92:

Henke - Made almost $3.4 in last year in Tor., made ~$10 mil over next 3 years (a 2 yr deal with Texas, then a year in St. Louis). All were excellent years, though in the team's defense, no one could have guess what would happen to Ward.

Key - Made just under $1.5 in '92, signed for 3 yrs and ~$15 with (blech) Yankees. First two years were great value, third was injury shortened and unremarkable.  He made about $9.5 over the following three years which included two average years and a quite good one. Those were age 32-37 years.

David Cone - signed for 3 years and $13 mil (the last year of whch he came back to the Jays via trade) for age 30-32 seasons, and then 3/16 for the Yanks (blech) for age 33-35 seasons.

Cone and Key were let go, and Morris had been signed prior to '92 for more money than either of the younger pitchers would make.

Here's a chart of year, age, and salary for the 4 pitchers

Name -- '93 - '94 - '95
Key - (32) 4.9 - (33) 5.35 - (34) 4.9
Cone - (30) 5 - (31) 5 - (32) 8 - (33) 4.67 - (34) 4.67 - (35) 6.67
Morris - (38) 5.425
Stewart - (36) 4.3 - (37) 4.25

You couldn't have been expected to know you'd acquire Cone when you signed Morris, so you compare Morris to Key, since you had Key in hand when you signed Morris (and in theory had the opportunity to resign him after '92)

Over the previous six seasons to '92, Key had won 99 games, with a 3.35 ERA a 1.175 WHIP and a (then non-existant) 125 ERA+
Over those same six season Morris won '93 games, had a 3.83 ERA, a 1.278 WHIP and a 107 ERA+

Signing Morris to any deal which made it impossible to re-sign Key was, IMO, an obvious mistake. Especially over the long term (Key pitched better than Morris in '92 as well)

Likewise, and an easier comparison because Cone was allowed to leave in the same off-season in which Stewart was added, it's not difficult to conclude this too was a big mistake.

Over the preceeding six season, Cone had 84 wins, a 3.06 ERA, a 1.87 WHP and a 116 ERA+
Over HIS previous six season (the best of his career) Stewart had 107 wins, a 3.56 ERA, a 1.29 WHIP and a 108 ERA+.

And Cone was coming into his age 30 season while Stewart was coming into his age 36 season. Stewart's ERA+ in '93 was 98, Cone's was 138

So right off, in the first year, two of the three most important free agent loses should never have happened. Take Stewart and Lieter out of the '94 rotation for Cone and Key and that season looks much better. '95 might not have been much different, if Key's injury had occured in this alternate universes, Cone might well have still been dealt (another mistake, IMO but more on that later)

But even though you have to assume multiple re-signings, my objective as GM would have been to keep Cone and Key around not just for 3 years but through the rest of their productive years.

It seems my premise is too ambitious for one post  so I'll stop for now.

No one left after '93 that I'd have wanted to re-sign except Henderson and Fernandez.

The idea that Gonzo was coming has SOME merit, but Schofield only made $147k more than Fernandez made in '94. Henderson, I suppose, they can argue they couldn't afford since he would have added about $4 mil to the payroll, but the '94 payroll was down about 4 mill from the '93 payroll (and this on the heels of a couple of championships!) so that's kinda weak.

But these are not so obvious and grevious as those in my previus post.  Also, there might have been - in the case of Henderson particularly - other factors (not wanting to play in the East, not being great in the clubhouse, or some such) that we as fans wouldn't know.

After '94, we could afford to lose all those guys, after '95 was when the salary Ax fell.

But the '95 Jays were loaded with young players with seemingly excellent upside. Olerud was 26, Gonzo and Green were 22, Sprauge (a marginal talent but still) only 27 - and Alomar was right there at 27 as well. Catching was a weakness (though the great teams hadn't had great hitting catchers) but Sandy Martinez, too, was only 24 and might have been expected to eventually hit at least as well as Borders.

Carter and Molitor were the only old guys starting, so letting Molly go - as much as I loved him - wasn't irrational. White was 32 but as good as he was, he could have stayed to provide some seasoning to the young group, and Carter could have slid to DH or rationally, eventually, the bench.

Hentgen, Lieter, and Guzman were all under 30 and the re-acquired Cone was just 32.

By my logic, given how highly regarded Gonzo, Green, Delgado, and Hentgen (And Carpenter, Stewart, Esco further behind) had been regarded, this was a team with a future. So let Molitor go, and try to re-sign  Lieter, White, and expecially Alomar.

White was replaced by the much older Otis Nixon who made $1.1 less in '96 and 1.9 less in '97.(God how I hated that move)

Lieter (who I remember some contraversy about his leaving but not sure if the true story ever came out) was replaced by Erik Hanson. Hanson made MORE over his 3 years in Toronto (age 31-33) than Lieter made over the next three (30-32) - hated this one too. Partly because of how long we'd waited on Lieter to get good.

But if You'd kept Cone and Key you could have let Lieter go fairly comfortably.

To me, then, the one thing left to keeping that team together was Alomar. He made ~$17 mil over his three years in Baltimore. There's no one on the Jays' '96 roster you can point to where that money went - it was a strat dollar saving move. He made ~$4.3 in '96 which would have pushed the team salary that year to just under $33 mil.

But in '97 and '98 they were back to spending big - over $8 mil for Clemens, almost 3 for Merced, 2.5 for Santiago. if you take the $2.5 Santiago made (to supposedly upgrade from O'Brien and the 2.4 Carlos Garcia made, you are most of the way to Alomar's '97 salary.
My views on trading Olerud - especially with such spending affoot in '97, are already on record.

Consider that the '97 team made just under $46 mil then refit it with players that should have stayed:

Clemens
Hentgen
Cone
Lieter/Key (assume that after '95 you keep one and let the other walk)
Williams

Those five made, collectively, ~$20.7 (assuming Key) in '97
The actual starting five made 12.62 (fr six guys)(This was the year Carp broke in)

The starting lineup could have been

O'Brien
Olerud
Alomar
Gonzo
Sprague
Cruz/Stewart
White
Green
Delgado

(this assumes that the Jays were unwilling to use Cruz in CF which would have been an economical alternative to having Nixon out there)

That lineup would have made ~$21.28 million (not counting Stewart)
The actual starting nine made ~$19.8

But there's one caveat - Joe Carter was still in the death throws of that big five year deal (which in some regards might have been worse for the franchise than Wells' deal) which ought to have been 3 years.

For my plan to work, someone would have had to have taken Carter's contract off our hands that winter the way the mets were happy to take Olerud's But hey, if that's too much to ask then you sub Carter in for Olerud in my lineup above since they made the same money in '97

So, For $8 million-ish more than what they actually spent, they could have had a much better team. (co-incidentally, Clemens made $8.25 million so if you are willing to give him up, you could have kept the long-time Jays for the same payroll level.

Alternately, if you'd been willing to let White go and not sign Nixon (no idea who your CF in '96 would be) then Cruz in CF would drop that $8 million gap to about $4.5

I know that this post, in particular, is a bit unfocused and rambling (shout out to my fans!) but the upshot is that the key players to have kept from the World Series years are Key and Cone after '93, and Alomar after '95 - and to a lesser extent White after '95 and Fernandez after '93  and all this could have been done without very much added expense at all.

Keep White through '98, Alomar through '99, cone through '98 (two 3 year deals) ad key throughout his career and the Jays would quite possibly have run their string of winning seasons to 16 or 17 and likely had a few more playoff appearances.

And the total cost would have been maybe $20-30 extra million spread over 5-6 years.

(Highly speculative of course)

Joe Carter was still in the death throes of that big five year deal (which in some regards might have been worse for the franchise than Wells' deal) which ought to have been 3 years.

It actually was a three year contract, with a club option for a fourth year. The club picked up that option, which covered the 1996 season. Then in July 1996 they gave him a one year extension, which took him through the 1997 season.

So they could have let him walk after '95? (I'd forgotten that) AND '96?

AK! That makes a lot of those moves in those days look a LOT worse

Ugh. Forgot how many times the Jays could've say 'good bye' to Carter. His big HR was great, but they didn't have to keep playing him for years after that.

1995: Carter hit 253/300/428 with 76 RBI OPS+ of 88 - perfect time to let him go, but instead he had a $1 million pay cut

1996: Carter hit 253/306/475 with 30 HR and 107 RBI but OPS+ of 95 - again, nice time to say 'so long and thanks for all the fish' but instead he had a $25k pay cut. Guess what? He made the All-Star team this season as well.

1997: Carter hit 234/284/399 OPS+ of 77 (!) but 102 RBI somehow, but after Cito was let go Carter wanted to leave.

What is interesting is the last year pre-Toronto Carter hit 232/290/391 - very close to his last year in Toronto. Just caught me as a funny thing. From 1995 to the end Carter was a negative in WAR every year (based on B-R's version).

Takeover rumours for Labatts had begun in the early Spring of 1991 (yes, 1991).  And by August of 1992 Labatts announced it was going to have to cut about 200 jobs.  A man named George Taylor was now [1992] running things -- not Peter Hardy, nor Peter Widderington, nor even Sam Pollock or Sid Oland.   Taylor had taken over from Sid Oland, if I have this correct;  so the old bedrock group upon which the team had been built was crumbling.   The company thrashed about rather wildly over the next couple of years, sticking a thumb into various seemingly-promising enterprises, but couldn’t stave off Interbrew’s eventual takeover in 1995.  Nothing was stable at old Labatts.

The Jays led MLB in payroll in 1992, and went slowly downhill thereafter.  (Not 1996.)  So it’s not apparent how a team ownership that was foundering could spend much time or energy (let alone money) on what was after all one of its peripheral activities.  Teams don’t get out on to the field by trading playing cards.   More factors than any of us could even guess come into play.  So the kind of they-should-have-done-this, they-should-have-done-that, they-had-X-dollars-to-spend is absolutely pointless conjecture.

This story shows how very important sound leadership is to a franchise.  The Jays had it for a decade and more.   We’ll see how current ownership stacks up in due time.  The Jays, unfortunately, are something of a side-interest for them as well.

Good points, Dewey.  You are probably right that the Jays are a side interest for Rogers.  Although it does seem to me that a nationwide monopoly interest in a major sporting team would have large content value for a media/telecommunications giant in a changing environment.

It should be noted, for the benefit of younger readers, that the CIBC had at one time a significant interest in the Jays and the bank marketed itself as "The Bank of the Blue Jays".  This may seem impossible to believe now. 

I see the Jays with Rogers being much like the Jays with Labatt - a side interest that has value as a marketing tool.

If the Jays do well then Rogers Sportsnet and radio stations will do well also automatically. An even more direct relationship than the Jays winning = more people buying Labatt beer. I know I never buy/drink beer, thus Labatt didn't gain one cent out of me outside of ticket sales and increased local TV rights due to my watching the Jays (remember, merchandise is split among all 30 teams). Rogers, on the other hand, can gain more advertising quite easily due to my watching more games (immediate revenue vs the delay in increased rights fees for Labatt) or my buying the new Sportsnet 1 channel (well, I won't do that but if they made a Blue Jays channel I'd be signing up quick). Rogers can also gain revenue through their outlets/cell phones/etc. due to the ability to use the Jays logo on them to promote their products.

Basically, Rogers has far more ways to bring in the bucks due to a winning Jays team than Labatt ever did. Probably why AA claims he has an open budget as Rogers just needs to see that spending $x = revenue of $y in increased viewership/ticket sales/etc. Whereas Interbrew knew nothing about baseball (being European) thus had trouble seeing the direct relationships and were limited in scope as once a TV deal was signed the extra revenue was harder to gain.

When it comes to the trades/free agents/etc. my biggest issue is how poor the return was. Only 2 solid players in exchange for a massive number of high caliber players. Yes, sometimes things don't work out but still one would've thought Ash & Gillick could've found a few good prospects. Cruz Jr via trade was an obvious trade (2 relievers for a 23 year old hitting for a 120 OPS+ at the time was a steal), Carpenter was a great draft pick, but that was it for above average talent (and that is stretching it as Cruz Jr had a 102 OPS+ as a Jay and Carpenter a 99 ERA+).

Look at the trades the Jays did in 92/93 - Jeff Kent (24) & Ryan Thompson (24) for David Cone, Derek Bell (24) for Darrin Jackson, Steve Karsay (21) for Rickey Henderson, Ducey (27) & Myers(26) for Eichhorn. Tons of quality youngsters for vets they thought could push them over the top (and they did). Then see the horrid quality they got back when dumping their vets. Budget has nothing to do with it, just poor trades and not thinking ahead (ie: not trading Alomar, White, etc. when you knew you were going nowhere).

Ah well. What is done is done. AA seems to know a lot about this stuff, and is putting money into the kids. Lets hope it works and if it doesn't that he gets value for the vets he has to dump.

The Jays led MLB in payroll in 1992, and went slowly downhill thereafter.  (Not 1996.)

2002	$ 1,650,000	$ 76,864,333
2001	$ 2,191,667	$ 76,895,999
2000	$ 716,667	$ 46,363,332
1999	$ 491,667	$ 48,165,333
1998	$ 1,312,500	$ 48,415,000
1997	$ 625,000	$ 45,894,833
1996	$ 261,250	$ 28,486,708
1995	$ 425,000	$ 49,791,500
1994	$ 530,000	$ 41,937,668
1993	$ 700,000	$ 45,747,666
1992	$ 925,000	$ 43,663,666

http://content.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/salaries/teamresults.aspx?team=14

Jays were #3 in '92
#1 in '93
#2 in '94 (less than 3 mil behind #1)
#1 in '95
#16 in '96
#9 in '97
#11 in '98
#14 in '99
#21 in '00

While the Jays' payroll remained relatively consistant from '97 to '00, the top salary rose from ~$52 million in '96 to almost $93 million in '00 and the whole scale moved up accordingly.

The jays declined to keep up with that escelation but they were not reducing salary. there was no major difference in what they spent in '97-'00 than what they spent in '92-'94 - it's just that the market escelated away from them.

The ONE year which saw a dramatic decline in payroll was '96.

(Which is not to say other, less obvious, expenses were not cut - before the access we have now someone as far away as i wouldn't ever have heard one way or the other on that)

http://content.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/salaries/totalpayroll.aspx?year=1996

I am very impressed with the knowledge and analysis of our team's downward spiral. Thanks Bauxites.

I am now thinking that if we do the exact opposite, we have a very good chance getting back to the top. I see some of it happening too.
1) Somehow reestablish Latin America as a good source of talent.
2) IMO #1 draft picks A Rios & M Negron had a low signing bonus amount as an attractive feature. If this is indeed true then a $1.5 mil bonus for 5th Round D Thon Jr applies as doing the opposite. I believe somewhere in statistical theory this is supposed to increase success.

AA probably knows that theory regarding draft stuff.

Growing up in Montreal, AA probably learned a few things.
1) How to be smart... see Sam Pollock... also J Drapeau.
2)Theres' Gold in them hills... Have a last chance opportunity by inviting everyone who can throw a baseball or thinks that he can throw a baseball to a mass tryout camp and have Dennis Martinez emerge. Well I think that is how it happened.
3) I believe AA said something like you always want to KNOW what you are giving up. RANDY JOHNSON. I don't know what ceiling level RJ was showing he might have. Good, Great or Other.

Please correct any faults in my background knowledge and theories for progress.

Ooh, John Norrthey, hip hip hooray for the smoothly embedded Douglas Adams reference. Three cheers and a veritable kettle of cuttlefish to you!