The Rivera story was from Ken Rosenthal and he was on the FAN this morning saying that everyone knows the Jays would like to move Rivera but that it's unlikely to happen unless some team comes out of spring training needing an outfielder. 

It seems the Jays are fond of signing low profile MLB or minor league veteran and trying to turn them into valuable assets. Gonzalez II, Buck, Chad Cordero, Dotel and now Shealy.

No jokes intended. Maybe the Jays could sign Ryan Klosterman in place of Jesus Merchan, also reach out to Jermy Acey, Carlo Cota, and Jason Perry; at least all are former Jays' June draft picks and have been playing professional baseball up to 2010.

It seems the Jays are fond of signing low profile MLB or minor league veteran and trying to turn them into valuable assets. Gonzalez II, Buck, Chad Cordero, Dotel and now Shealy.

Except that Shealy doesn't figure to get many MLBs and establish any value.

Yes, yes, Arby's mascot.

Worst. Valentine's. Day. Getup. Ever.

(So  there.) 

Mick, is that a photo of you waving your much beloved Michael Young goodbye?

It's pretty obvious that Anthopolous is trying to trade Rivera and his bloated $5.25-million salary.  Which raises the equally obvious point:  Anthopolous must still be working on a deal to acquire a 3B or an OF.  (If Rivera is traded and Bautista goes back to RF, who plays 3B?  Given everything that happened last year, I don't see EE as the likely answer -- especially since it would create another hole at DH or 1B.) 

And given the arc of AA's deals over the past 16 months -- his relentless trimming of the payroll, his strong preference for young prospects over veterans -- it stands to reason that his current obsessive focus is on Bautista, probably to trade him for prospects, if not now then early in the season.  All of which is to say:  It might be very premature to be previewing the Jays lineup at this point in time. There are probably two or three shoes still in the air, waiting to drop.

No Chuck, the Arby's guy is MUCH thinner than I am.

And for the record, I'm not a huge MY guy. One of the greatest contributing players in the history of  a franchise that hasn't had many. But if he is, as I suspect, next season playing 2B for the Rockies, he will be much better defensively, and thanks to park factors, offensively.

I remember back when Shealy was thought of as a more or less major league ready 1B who was simply behind Todd Helton on the depth chart, and thus wouldn't be used in Colorado. Then he was traded to KC, and seems to have regressed as a hitter. If you look at his minor-league track record you'll be fairly impressed. I wouldn't say that the chance of him becoming a valuable commodity is nil. Most likely he'll need a lot of good coaching, but I could see him rebounding, and maybe even being a successful major leaguer. A good low-risk signing.

but I could see him rebounding, and maybe even being a successful major leaguer

Anything's possible, I guess, but he's already 31. Even if he had it in him to become a successful major leaguer -- certainly a dubious proposition given his recent track record -- how likely is that anyone would even give him the major league at-bats to find out?

AA may have his policy that the club will not sign any one-year contracts after exchanging numbers. But, Bautista has policies of his own and told the Toronto Sun that he won't sign a long-term contract or extension with the club once Monday's hearing has taken place.

If neither side backs down, Bautista will be headed to free agency after this season, whether he is with the Blue Jays or has been traded during the middle of it.

Of course, both sides could avoid breaking their policy by agreeing on a multi-year deal before the hearing, but the Jays have clearly shown no inclination to do so with Bautista so far. Which is what has led to this catch-22 of sorts, where the Jays want to see if Bautista can replicate 75 or 80% of his 2010, but if he does so, not only will he become much more expensive, but he'll also be the subject of a free agent bidding war.

I think there's an elephant in the room.

IMO Bautista will go to arbitration, then once his price for 2011 is set either AA will go for a multi-year deal using that as the base, or (more likely) will trade Bautista sometime between the decision on salary and shortly after the Jays see if Lawrie looks ready (ie: what shape is he in coming to spring, attitude, and within a few days they should have a good idea of if he is mentally ready for the majors).

If Lawrie looks to have a bad attitude or one that will require time in AAA to 'smooth out' then Bautista would go for a third baseman. If not then you could trade Bautista for anything the Jays could use (1B, OF, 3B, CA, yet more relievers, whatever).

I also think it's more likely the Jays trade Bautista. I can't imagine his trade value ever being higher. As I alluded to earlier, I can't help but think the club wonders like I do how a guy with a career OPS+ of around 97, all of sudden hits as many home runs as Mickey Mantle in his best year. Only the Mick had three prior seasons with 40+ homers while Bautista had a career high of 16. I think if 'batting adjustments' yielded that kind of result, a lot more guys than Kiner, Mantle and Maris, who each only did it once, would have hit 54 home runs in the almost 60 seasons between 1938, when Greenberg did it, to the post-1997 era, when everyone with a 'trainer' did it.

I think it's impossible for the club to enter into a 'club risk' long term contract in those circumstances. You're obviously not going to hear the club mention it (like the Arizona owner once commented about Luis Gonzalez' 'miraculous' 57 home run season), but I can't help but think it's in their minds and informs their view of the situation much more than is mentioned anywhere.

An ESPN Spanish reporter has announced the Jays have requested a postponement of Bautista's arbitration hearing until Friday, because the two sides are working on a multi-year contract.

What about an incentive laden contract?  Not sure if this has been mentioned...

Offsets the risk for both sides.  It seems fair to both sides.

You can't have performance incentives for numbers of home runs, batting average, etc.  Generally incentives allowed are for games played or at-bats.

I'm surprised there isn't more discussion here about the multi-year contract for Bautista, which now seems on the verge of happening.  Regardless of the exact amount of money involved, the very fact that he's getting a multi-year deal has a lot of implications for the Jays.  I would assume it's a minimum of three years, and more than $30-million, plus club options for one or more future years -- maybe structured with some similarities to the Aaron Hill deal. 

In my view, it's also a likely prelude to a trade, although it might not happen until June or July (unless Bautista suffers a severe decline in performance in 2011, which I don't think is likely).  If the Jays have secured Bautista to a multi-year deal, he becomes more valuable to any trading partner, and Anthopolous will find it easier to get a significant haul of young prospects for him.  If he hits well in the first half of this season, and if he's signed to a long-term deal, Bautista's trade value will be at its peak by July.  It's hard to imagine how Anthopolous will resist the temptation to deal him.

I  expect a long term contract that will give up some measure of trade control to the player. Bautista has often stated a desire to remain a Bluejay so signing a deal which would make him more tradable seems at cross purposes to his aim. Also if the Jays are preparing to seriously compete as soon as 2012 they cannot continue to trade the present for the future. Plus they do need to sell tickets and at this point Jose is their biggest draw.

Draw or not is secondary - the big question is can Bautista be a productive $10+ million player going forward for the next 3-5 years.

Not an easy thing to debate for the Jays. When I tried finding comps for his sudden jump at his age after years of so-so performance the only comparison I could find was Sammy Sosa.

Sosa through age 28: 257/308/469 106 OPS+ with a 99 in his age 28 season. Then came a 160 OPS+, the start of 5 straight years of 150+ OPS+ (including a 203 in 2001).

Bautista through age 28: 238/329/400 91 OPS+ with a 99 in his age 28 season. Then came a 166 OPS+ followed by...?

Sosa was a better slugger pre-jump at 29 but in the end neither was much of anything at age 28 and at that point both were very available to other teams for next to nothing I'd bet.

Of course, we all know Sosa used a corked bat and the general feeling is he was on various drugs as well (no proof afaik, but strong suspicion). The question is could Bautista be for real and hold onto his drastic increase in power? Sosa is a positive sign, but one with major warnings. Meanwhile I cannot think of anyone else who jumped by 60 points of OPS+ from 28 to 29.

If he hits well in the first half of this season, and if he's signed to a long-term deal, Bautista's trade value will be at its peak by July.  It's hard to imagine how Anthopolous will resist the temptation to deal him.

Why?  If you have a 30 year old who has an established performance level of "superstar" who is signed to a below-free-agent level of compensation for 3-4 years say and you are intending to compete with a $140 million payroll, why would you trade him for prospects?  With the Wells' contract gone, there would be absolutely no reason to do this unless you weren't intending to compete for 3-4 years.

At this point, all of this is hypothetical.  I am hopeful that a deal is reached, and I take the decision to adjourn the arbitration proceeding as a good sign for Anthopoulos' development as a GM. 

The fact that contract negotiations have delayed the arbitration hearing is pretty sound proof that the Jays have confidence that Bautista has gained a repeatable skill. Either that or this is some grand gesture to appear to try to sign their slugger so as to perhaps stir the trade pot?

I think the Jays delaying arbitration is a clear sign they want to sign and keep Bautista.  I don't see how signing a long term contract makes Bautista more tradeable unless he's signing a low-ball offer.  If the Jays wanted to trade him they apparently had a pretty good suitor with the Red Sox this offseason.

If you're Bautista, even if you have great confidence in yourself, this could be the only time you have $20+ million on the table.  There's always the chance of regression and there's always the chance of an injury.  For someone that's made about $7 million in his career so far that's a big increase that you can set you up for life and then some.

The Jays have time on their side and they've been happy to say they'll use it, and they also have the hammer of arbitration next year.  That wouldn't stop other teams from trying to sign him, but there's a cost to that that other teams are reluctant to give and that should be reflected in their offer (that the Jays wouldn't have to be concerned with).  And if the price gets too high the Jays have been plenty happy to collect the picks.  I think the Jays are in a little better of a negotiating position.

That they're taking 4 additional days, after having an offseason to negotiate, I think we'll see something worked out.  I think it's obvious that there would be at least two years guaranteed (as opposed to a Frasor 1+1 team option).  And if AA has shown anything as a GM it's that he values team options highly.  So is it 2 guaranteed plus future options, or 3 guaranteed and future options?  And what would the money be?

Just as a guess I'll say the Jays sign Bautista to:

• 2011 - $9 million;
  
• 2012 - $11 million;
  
• 2013 - $14 million team option with $4 million buyout;
  
• 2014 - $15 million team option with $1 million buyout
  

That gives Bautista $24 million guaranteed for 2 years, with the potential for $35 million over 3 years and $50 million over 4 years.  The 2013 buyout would be large enough where if the Jays don't want him at that point he gets paid well for 2 years.  And the options are large enough where if Bautista performs well he'll still get paid well.

If it's 3 guaranteed years I think you would shave a little bit off of the amounts.  So maybe $9, $10, $12 with an option for $13 with a $2 million buyout (3 for $33 guaranteed, max of 4 for $44).

....If you have a 30 year old who has an established performance level of "superstar".....

Of course I never suggested that Bautista will establish himself as a "superstar" in the first half of this season.  Most analysts would agree that "superstar" is not the most likely scenario for Bautista going forward.   What I actually said was:  if Bautista "hits well" in the first half of this season, he could be traded.  Most people expect that he is likely to regress to the level of a good hitter, perhaps a very good hitter (30 or 35 home runs, maybe an .850 OPS, with average defence).  This would still give him lots of trade value, but something short of "superstar" value. In that likely scenario, at the age of 30 or 31, he'd have more value for a contending team, not the rebuilding Jays, and a trade would be the most logical scenario for a prospect-hunting GM like Anthopolous.

If Bautista somehow establishes himself as a consistent .950 OPS guy with 50 home runs a season, and a below-market contract, he would certainly be a superstar that the Jays should keep.  But that's not what most people expect.  If the Jays have a $35-million three-year contract with a former home-run-king who regresses to the level of Vernon Wells last season, and who could continue to regress in 2012 and 2013 when the Jays are pushing for contention, Anthopolous would be more likely to trade him.

....I don't see how signing a long term contract makes Bautista more tradeable unless he's signing a low-ball offer....

It's simple.  Any contract that Bautista signs today would be somewhat discounted by the risk that he regresses to his pre-2010 level of performance.  It's not a huge risk, but there's enough of a risk that it would be factored into the contract.  As soon as Bautista negates that risk -- by hitting well in the first half of 2011 -- he immediately gains more market value than the value of his contract.  Moreover, he has greater value to a trading partner because he would be under the team's control for future years, rather than becoming a free agent at the end of this season.  Obviously a team would rather trade for multiple years of control of a good hitter, rather than a three-month rental of a guy who could disappear at the end of the season.

....If the Jays wanted to trade him they apparently had a pretty good suitor with the Red Sox this offseason....

Sure, but the Red Sox (or any other team) would pay a higher price for Bautista if he hits well in the first half of 2011 and if he's controlled for future years as well.  As usual, Anthopolous is hoarding his assets until they reach their peak value, and then selling high.

OK.  Let's say he hits like Jayson Werth did the last two years.  The point is the same.  Why would you trade him if you had him signed at less-than-free-agent dollars?  It's not as though the Jays have Domonic Brown waiting to replace him.

They might not have Domonic Brown waiting in the wings, but they do have Brett Lawrie.

Glad to see the two sides are still talking.  AA said right from the start that he would be guided by the arbitration process, and last-minute negotiating is part of the process. Josh Hamilton recently signing for $24 million for two years helps inform both sides. I feel the same about this as I felt a couple months ago, that while I think the Jays made a fair offer for arbitration the best scenario is to sign Bautista to a two-year deal for about $20 million. It involves some risk on both sides (about $10 million on the Jays' side, one year of FA on Bautista's), but also makes sense for both sides. It's a bridge to the next stage of team development and would eliminate the uncertainity about where Bautista goes from here with his hitting. If he continues to hit well (30-plus HRs, which I think is likely), then he's good value and could have a longer term FA equivalent extension negotiated in the next off-season that keeps him with the Jays  through contending seasons in 2013-16, whether it's at RF, 1B, 3B or DH. Short term, it makes him better trade value this year than he would be as a rental in mid-season. If Bautista prefers to test FA eventually he'll still be young enough in November 2012 (31 years old) to earn a career-ending long-term deal somewhere. If he doesn't hit well, it's not punitive long-term for the club and gives Bautista $20 million for what amounts to one great season.

Lawrie's a third baseman right now.  He might take the Larry Parrish route to right-field eventually, but it's not as though the club has a wealth of upper level prospects at third base either. 

One of the great things about the Wells' deal was that it allowed the club to attempt to compete on a more expedited basis.  You do not want to be constantly recycling prime-age talent for prospects in that situation.

Mike, I truly hope that you're right about the Wells deal.  If it means that Anthopolous is already investing the Wells money into something that otherwise wouldn't happen -- if it means that Bautista is being signed for 2012 and 2013, essentially as a free agent, the first acquisition of more to come -- then I'd be much more optimistic about the Jays' chances of competing in 2012.  It would be great if it happens.  But unfortunately I think it's more likely that Anthopolous is aiming to contend in 2013 or 2014, when Bautista is unlikely to be in his prime. 

Incidentally, you appear to be assuming that Bautista is the Jays right-fielder this season.  It's a reasonable guess, but -- just out of curiosity -- who are you expecting to play 3B for the Jays this year?  It's a little too early for Lawrie to get the job, surely?  And if Encarnacion shifts back to 3B, who is the DH?  Do they put Rivera at DH, at a bloated cost of $5.25-million?  I've always assumed that Anthopolous is working on another acquisition -- if only a Posednik-type deal -- but he is running out of time.

As it stands now, whether Bautista is at third or in right field, they probably have Rivera somewhere on an everyday basis and he sure isn't much in the outfield at this stage of his career.  Personally, if it were my club and Bautista was at third base (presumably for one season), I'd move Snider to right field and platoon Thames and Mastroianni in left (with Mastro acting as an occasional centerfielder).  That doesn't seem to be on the agenda.