In Lawrie's case, the development issue is not really batting skill but defence and maturity.  He is 21 years old and learning a new position.  He has been cocky, but this may be changing.  The fear is that he arrives in the majors, makes a ton of errors, and his defensive struggles affect his offensive game.  I can understand why the club might be keeping him in triple A for development purposes, but I have no patience with the suggestion that he ought to be there to avoid super 2 status.  The organization has committed to a $140 million payroll down the road, in other words to compete financially with the Red Sox but not the Yankees, and super 2 issues are a relative drop in the bucket.

Fair enough. How do you decide when he's skilled (/unerratic) enough at third to justify taking that risk? Are they looking for fundamentals, or performance, or an omen, or...

Hopefully, you would look at everything.  Technical skill, actual performance and "intangible" comfort level.  It is a judgment call.  My very subjective impression is that Lawrie's defence might require another month or two.  The maturity issues too can be overstated; he's not Alex Rios or Delmon Young at 21.  As long as he remains focused while he struggles and adapts, it won't be a big issue.

Probably because at the time they couldn't conceive that someone would take the dead weight that is Wells off their hands.

There would still be a marginal benefit of a couple million dollars - a relative pittance of course. But surely more valuable than the marginal benefit of a week and a half of Brett Lawrie at this stage.

I'm not supporting the strategy in general: but there are moments that it would make some sense to wait the extra ten days.

It will be interesting to see what Farrell does if the Jays are up by a run or two in the 9th inning today. Frasor? Camp? Rauch? It's hard to imagine he would go to Francisco again.

For morale reasons, the Jays really need to win this series.

Reyes has really been very good over his last five starts: 28.1 IP, 8 ER, 19 K, 5 BB, 2.54 ERA. I'm cherry picking of course, if I'd gone back seven starts it would be a rather less impressive picture, but, for the last month or so he's pitched far better than I had realised.

I thought Arencibia's pitch-calling became very predictable in the ninth. Fastball, outside corner, and the Yankees were sitting on it. It doesn't matter how amazing your fastball is (and though Francisco's is pretty good, it's definitely not amazing), you can't just throw fastballs over the outside part of the plate over and over, especially in the ninth inning when hitters are desperately zoned in on getting a pitch to hit. The Posada at-bat in particular had me yelling at the computer when Arencibia set up for the fastball on the outside edge. Don't throw an amped up pinch hitter a first pitch fastball! More than the Yankees mystique, I hate the closer=fastball equation that is maybe less prevalent than it once was, but still seems to have some followers. Come the ninth inning it becomes this weird game of fate where you throw a bunch fastballs and see what happens.

About Lawrie: there are four reasons claimed by different parties for why Lawrie is not ready.

1) He needs to develop plate discipline.
2) His fielding clearly needs work.
3) His arrogance/attitude needs work.
4) The Super Two cutoff.

As I see it, calling him up to the majors creates opportunities to resolve these issues:
1) Striking out a lot is good incentive to change your approach. He can get away with things in Vegas that won't fly in Toronto. Admittedly having the GM repeatedly say that you'll get called up when you have a better K/BB ratio can be good incentive.
2) He'll get practice on the Astroturf as well as reps with Butterfield and Jonny Mac if he's wise enough to listen.
3) The best way to treat arrogance/attitude is to have him fail. This is a win/win scenario. If he is called up and is awesome, then perhaps his arrogance/attitude is not such of a problem, and if he is called up and struggles, then maybe he'll eat a little humble pie.
4) Meh. Not my money.

With respect to Lawrie I am quite convinced the Super Two cutoff is the only reason he is not up yet. As soon as it has passed he will be up quite quickly. When is the 'safe' date thought to be - June 1st ?

Mike Green, When you say committed $140mil to payroll, you are talking about what the FO has said they are willing to do. Is this correct? As of now those are not signed commitments, i believe.

I am not trying to start an argument but I have my rather strong beliefs about how they (AA) plans on spending. I can see less or even more than $140mil.

Let me be specific on some possible financial moves.
1) AA increased spending on scouts, added a farm team, Intl FA & the draft.
2) Long term deals to R Romero, Lind & J Bautista and I expect more of the same. He will make mistakes(?) in not getting value due to injuries & poor performance and some contracts will be bargains. But you have to develop players worthy of this type of spending.
3) $2-4mil on relievers is definitely spending.
4) I don't see Marcum for Lawrie as saving $. Rather I see it as trading talent to acquire talent and from an area of strength. So if Litsch or Morrow is traded for super prospects ??? again I see it as talent for talent.
5) AA did not trade for Z Greinke in the off season. Why? Too much $, talent to give up, 2011 is not a contending (96 win) year. Also if anyone wants to say that he would be the 2011 teams best SP, then fine ,I won't argue. This has to be based on evaluation/guessing not "after 2 months his record states he is clearly #1 or #3". He would not have to earn his spot, so he would take the 3-5 which belongs to Drabek, Litsck and Reyes right now. Greinke is $12mil but for only 2 years, so it is not a long term risk or commitment. I can see AA doing this.
6) AA has not successfully signed an expensive FA yet. Maybe he will one day but it will mean big $ & # years. The player may even be old near the end of the contract. But AA would manage to get out of it. Expensive has to be over $10/year as a condition of being specific.

I don't know what AA considers expensive. I see that he has out spent other teams in certain areas, so to me he has proven that he is not cheap. The spending choices are his to make, and I strongly feel that he will choose very few expensive trade or FA players, but instead will spend on gambles on high ceiling prospects.

Gwyn, you may very well be right.  If so, it would be the mark of a cheap organization which doesn't portend good things for the future.

If so, it would be the mark of a cheap organization... Sadly that's exactly what I believe Rogers' to be. I'm hoping I'm proved wrong and that starting this winter they show a commitment to spend some money and allow AA to invest in the free agent market, but I'm not holding my breath.

Gwen - rest your fevered brow - I KNOW why Brett's not up.

The PERFECT example was JMac last night. Guys on first and second a hard hit ball to JMac - try for the 2nd to first double play - or - do what JMac did - INSTANTLY - he ran to 3rd then threw to 1st for the double play. While Brett has more talent in his baby toe than most guys have in their whole body he still needs to LEARN - by REPETITION - what moves are the ones he CAN make and SHOULD make. My Grandmother Tilly has more experience at 3rd than Lawrie has and she only played there during the summer of 1939 at the "Moose Jaw School For Left Handed Girls with Dyslexia Summer Sports Camp and Flower Arranging Extravaganza" (at least that's what she told me an' my grandma would never lie to her favorite grandson - would she?).

When the team believes his muscle memory has enough of the 3rd base moves wired in - he'll be up. AND - he'll be one for the ages - no question.

Speaking of service time, John Lott notes in the Post that John McDonald reached ten years on Monday, guaranteeing him a tidy pension - and, since he's spent the last five years with the Jays, giving him the right to veto any trade.

An interesting theory Mylegacy, but if the idea is for Lawrie to learn a new infield position, why is he on the other side of the continent from the organisation's best infield teacher?

Elementary my dear Gwyn - in baseball you learn by INSTRUCTION and mostly by DOING. The team prefers him to learn (shit in the bed at AAA rather than at Rogers Center) until they're sure(ish) he's got it. Get it.

I'm sure that's what the organisation will say is the reason. I wonder if the Coaching staff would agree - if they ever went off the record. Personally I'd have liked to see Lawrie's bat in the lineup everyday from the start of the season. He could have been splitting time between DH and third, and spending his afternoons learning from Prof. Butterfield. Any problems that might have arisen from some initially dodgy glovework as he adapted to a new (and easier) position would have been more than cancelled out by the added offense he would added.

"Don't look now, but Reyes' peripheral stats are impressive."

It's interesting that the sabermetric community has coined the term "peripheral" to describe stats like K%, BB%, and GB%. I've always done this too, but you could argue that it makes more sense to call them "central" stats - since they are increasingly what scouts are focusing on - while relegating other, more traditional stats (such as W-L record and ERA) to the peripheral category.

Jesse Litsch's shoulder is not getting better.  He is going to see the doctor.

While Brett has more talent in his baby toe than most guys have in their whole body he still needs to LEARN - by REPETITION - what moves are the ones he CAN make and SHOULD make.

why can't he get that REPETITION up here in the bigs? what's the difference where that repetition happens? It's not like having him in there instead of RR/Mac/Nix is going to hurt us overall.

If you want, you can listen to: http://www.tsn.ca/window/podcastcentre.aspx?xmlURL=http://www2.tsn.ca/podcasts/tsnpodcast.xml&mp3URL=http://podcast.tsn.ca/tsnradio/ferguson_052511.mp3 as TSN's Mike Richards discusses the game.

Kevin Gregg blew 6 saves last season.   Last night was this team's 7th to date.  A.A. has just added Closer to his list of needs.   Heath Bell (34), Jonathan Broxton (28), Matt Capps (28), Frank Francisco (32) and Jonathan Papelbon (31) http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2010/03/2012-mlb-free-agents.html are some of the Free Agents A.A. could be interested in.

We could use a quality Left Fielder - Eric Thames or Travis Snider may yet earn that spot.   Juan Rivera and Corey Patterson are just filling in.   Rajai Davis is just keeping the spot warm in CF for whomever in the minors can take it.   We need a Third Baseman as good as Scott Rolen has been.   Brett Lawrie is a long way  from being that.   He might get close enough to call up by September, only we may need him sooner.   We need a D.H. as good as Winfield or Molitor - someone who can still play their position.

If Closer, Left Field, Third Base and D.H. were filled by better than we have, by how many games would we be leading this Division by - 7?

It's interesting that the sabermetric community has coined the term "peripheral" to describe stats like K%, BB%, and GB%. I've always done this too, but you could argue that it makes more sense to call them "central" stats - since they are increasingly what scouts are focusing on - while relegating other, more traditional stats (such as W-L record and ERA) to the peripheral category.

My guess is that in this case, runs are the the central stat, and thus K%, BB%, GB%, etc. are referred to as peripheral. Which makes sense; ultimately the pitcher's job is to prevent runs, not strike people out. It just happens that striking people out is one of the best ways to prevent runs. Peripheral really is a misnomer. Component might be better.

Heath Bell (34), Jonathan Broxton (28), Matt Capps (28), Frank Francisco (32) and Jonathan Papelbon (31)

I'd go after this Francisco guy.  I hear he's pretty good.

Wait... the team has blown 7 saves, thus needs a closer, so they could try to sign... their current closer?

the team has blown 7 saves, thus needs a closer, so they could try to sign... their current closer?

A plan so cunning you could stick a tail on it and call it a weasel.

from Fangraphs re: Super-2 and Lawrie/Jennings/Belt/Rizzo


http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/the-fearsome-foursome/

"ultimately the pitcher's job is to prevent runs"

Anders: fair point, but you could also argue that the pitcher's job is to pitch well, and that it's the team's job to prevent runs. Player A might be a magnificent GB pitcher, but he's going to struggle if his infield defense is horrible (think EE at 3B, Glaus at SS, Russ Adams at 2B, and, I don't know, maybe EE at 1B). Runs allowed is an important stat, maybe *the* central stat, but it may be that other stats (like BB/9 IP, K/9 IP, HR allowed/9 IP, or GO/AO) are now "essential" among scouts, especially when evaluating prospects.

"but he's going to struggle if his infield defense is horrible (think EE at 3B, Glaus at SS, Russ Adams at 2B, and, I don't know, maybe EE at 1B)"
Having two EE's out there really ought to do the trick. :)

I don't think Anders was implying that pitchers should be held 100% responsible for their runs allowed, just that runs are the fundamental currency of baseball and as such are by definition the central stat. I'd agree that scouts are probably putting more and more of a focus on component stats, as they should be, since component stats are more predictive of ERA than ERA itself.

regarding the meme "AA/the Jays have yet to spend any significant money!" two things apply.

1. they always said they would spend significant money to add once the foundation is in place. You may disagree with that, but that does not mean they have acted differently from their announced intentions. At no time did they say or imply that spending would happen in 2011.

2. There has to be something their, which fits your team, which is available - which is also expensive in $$$. For instance - the speculation is that the Mets will shed a lot of salary this summer. do you deal for Reyes? At what price for two or three months of work? and where do you play him? As far as I can see, unless Aaron Hill is part of the deal it doesn't make sense.
David Wright? Why? Lawrie will quite possibly be a better hitter, for less money and a longer time. if you say "we can move Lawrie" - to where? LF? Are you dealing Snider in the Wright deal? Maybe so but it's hardly a function of cheapness if Alex decides otherwise. Beltran? if he could still play CF i'd be all over it, even as a rental. but reportedly he can't. I suppose you could block both your kid LF and play him in Left. if the cost were reasonable.

Likewise the FA market this fall feature almost nothing that is better than what we have at the given position. there's no 2B better than Hill, no CF better than Davis, etc. it's a perfectly reasonable position to take that it's not wise to go after a major FA (or trade for an expensive guy) yet. of course, if he gets a chance to deal for, say, Josh Johnson knowing it will take massive money to sign him, i expect he'll at least explore it.

My point is, saying "spend money now damnit!!!!" s stupid. Spend money smartly. Suppose Lawrie is really as good as Sickels said, and soon. Suppose Thames is really an above average MLB hitter as a corner OF, and suppose Snider blossoms. Suppos Hill continues his current (last 10) production through the rest of the year. Supose Esco and Lind produce as they've shown this year they can. suppose this is the real JPA.

Next year you have the following starting 9:
Lawrie - Escobar - Hill - Lind - Bautista - Davis - Snider - Thames - JPA

Outside of Davis, maybe, there's not really anything out there you can get by throwing a big slug of money around (except Pujols and Fielder) that's obviously a big upgrade.

And if the jays can run that lineup out in 2012 and win 90 or more games without cracking 80-90 million in payroll, I'm FINE with that. Absolutely no reason to go out and sign a big contract just to prove you will sign big contracts. It has to make sense.

27 in a row for Reyes. Yikes. More scary is how our "deep young starting depth" is rapidly disappearing. When Litsch and Cecil are ready again, it's time to end the Reyes experiment. Sure he had a good ERA for a few games before the Yankees debacle. But 27 in a row. This type of "bad luck" seems to only happen every  90 years are so...

there's no 2B better than Hill,

pretty much any 2B is better than Hill. Jose Reyes in particular, though, would be a very nice upgrade.

pretty much any 2B is better than Hill.

Here's the list on MLBTR of potential free agent 2B after this season:

Clint Barmes (33)
Willie Bloomquist (34) - $1.1MM mutual option with a $150K buyout
Orlando Cabrera (37)
Robinson Cano (29) - $14MM club option with a $2MM buyout
Jamey Carroll (37)
Alex Cora (36)
Craig Counsell (41)
Mark Ellis (35)
Jerry Hairston Jr. (36)
Bill Hall (32) - mutual option
Aaron Hill (30) - $8MM club option for 2012 and $8MM club option for '13
Omar Infante (30)
Joe Inglett (34)
Kelly Johnson (30)
Adam Kennedy (36)
Felipe Lopez (32)
Jose Lopez (28)
Julio Lugo (36)
Aaron Miles (35)
Augie Ojeda (37)
Brandon Phillips (31) - $12MM club option with a $1MM buyou

Cano and Phillips will have their option picked up.

who else on that list would you rather have than Aaron Hill? There's at least 16 who, IMO, are not close to being better than Hill.  There are quite a few others as well.

For instance, the much beloved and longed for Orlando Hudson? .604 OPS

Frustration is clearly warranted but hyperbole proves nothing.

BTW, over the last 21 games (since April 13), Hill is slashing:

.300/.349/.400/.749

If that were his OPS for the full season t would rank 8th among all major league 2B.

I'm gonna wait and see whether the first 11 games is the abberation or the better play since. Both are small samples so I'll go with the most recent until events prove differently.

pretty much any 2B is better than Hill. Jose Reyes in particular, though, would be a very nice upgrade.

Is there anyway to adjust Hill's batting, just like Bautista's ?

Expanding on the thought- if you take Davis' 23 games since coming back from the injury, his line is:.307/.358/.398/.756

Looking at the 12 qualified CF who are doing better than that, and eliminating the very young and good guys as all but untouchable in a trade - potential targets would be:

Matt Kemp if the Dodgers go fire sale
Shane Victorino but there's no evidence he's available now or in the winter
BJ Upton.

There are no pending FA who are clearly better (so far) than Davis this year.

A Kemp deal would be exciting.

-------------------------------------------

Of those doing better than Hil this year - and ruling out the obviously unavailable - you have Beckham who might be tempting (even though his OPS is only .648) and....um....well.

Anyone else you'd say "what about?" regarding is, as far as i can see, unavailable. (that being the top 8 2B)

If you say "get a SS and move one of them to 2B" there's Reyes but after that it's Peralta which is probably an illusion, and a bunch more guys who are not on the market (unless you think we could score Alexei Ramirez and the marginal difference between him and Hill isn't really very great.

Beyond those two positions - and again, barring signing Pujols or Fielder, there's not a lot of "throw money at it" solutions out there.

Richard SS...I believe you were saying that we had an opportunity to sneak into the playoffs because the NYY & Rays seemed to get weaker, in the off season. I & a few other bauxites also felt that way. So far so good, i hope it lasts to July 31 & Sept 1. It should be interesting to see how it all ends.

If very close at July 31st, I will be curious to see AA's actions if any.

TamRa, if we look at the last two years WAR per 150gms, here's how Hill compares to those other names you mentioned:

R.Cano (29): 5.6
K.Johnson (30): 4.8
B.Phillips (31): 4.6
J.Reyes (28): 4.4
O.Hudson (34): 3.6
M.Ellis (35): 3.0
J.Carroll (38): 2.9
O.Infante (30): 2.4
A.Kennedy (36): 1.4
C.Barmes (33): 1.4
J.Hairston (36): 1.2
A.Hill (30): 1.1
O.Cabrera (37): 1.0
C.Counsell (41): 0.8
J.Inglett (34): 0.5
A.Miles (35): 0.3
J.Lopez (28): 0.1
B.Hall (32): 0.0
F.Lopez (32): 0.0
A.Cora (36): -0.3
A.Ojeda (37): -0.5
J.Lugo (36): -0.7
W.Bloomquist (34): -0.9

there's really no hyperbole from me here - aside from some of the dregs of the dregs, there's just many, many other better and cheaper options than Hill.

More to the point, we know that the Jays will never pick up Hill's $8m option next year.....so how much of a paycut will Hill be ready to accept?

His play doesn't justify a salary of more than a couple of mil, on a one or two year deal. Will he accept that? Because if he doesn't, there's no way we should be offering him more to stay...because the players with similar performance the last couple of years can be had for peanuts, and then if we feel like spending there's a number of significantly better options as well.

If you need a laugh today, ESPN notes that today is the anniversary of the greatest defensive play ever made.

For instance, the much beloved and longed for Orlando Hudson? .604 OPS.  Frustration is clearly warranted but hyperbole proves nothing.

Well, Hudson's 77 OPS+ is, sadly, better than Hill's 73.  Hudson has been the better hitter 3 out of the last 4 years and the year he wasn't better, he won the gold glove.

Not to say Hudson is a top-shelf 2B anymore, but between the two, Hudson certainly seems to be the better player at this point.  

By WAR, Hill is behind both McDonald and Mike McCoy this season.  His .287 wOBA is one of the worst among 2B in the majors.  Last year Hill was second to last among qualified 2B in wOBA (.291) and 4th last in WAR (1.2).  Far from being hyperbole, I think the statement carries a bit more truth than many of us would like to admit.  Here's hoping he turns it around.

there's really no hyperbole from me here

except that you're basing your analysis on the worst stretch of games in Hill's career.  not sure that's objective.  especially when he's looked a lot better this year, even though results are slower to come around.

A discussion amongst Mets fans about some Blue Jay prospects on a NY Giants board. Intersting take on what they think of some of our guys.

http://corner.bigblueinteractive.com/index.php?mode=2&thread=405148

I dunno - I really wish his career numbers were more encouraging, but they're not. He's a career .325woba hitter.

Here's how that compares to the rest of the starting 2B in baseball....

Career wOBA:

1) PHI C.Utley (32): .387
2) BOS D.Pedroia (27): .362
3) TEX I.Kinsler (29): .361
4) NYY R.Cano (28): .356
5) MIL R.Weeks (28): .353
6) ATL D.Uggla (31): .353
7) ARI K.Johnson (29): .345
8) BAL B.Roberts (33): .343
9) TBR B.Zobrist (30): .342
10) PIT N.Walker (25): .341
11) CHC J.Baker (30): .340
12) SDP O.Hudson (33): .336
13) LAA H.Kendrick* (27): .334
14) LAA M.Izturis* (29): .327
15) NYM D.Murphy (26): .327
16) KCR M.Aviles (30): .327
17) CIN B.Phillips (30): .326
18) SFG F.Sanchez (33): .326
19) TOR A.Hill (29): .325
20) STL S.Schumaker (31): .324
21) OAK M.Ellis (34): .322
22) CHX G.Beckham (24): .321
23) HOU B.Hall (31): .320
24) SEA A.Kennedy (35): .316
25) CLE O.Cabrera (35): .314
26) DET W.Rhymes (28): .313
27) COL J.Herrera (26): .309
28) FLA O.Infante (29): .309
29) WAS D.Espinosa (24): .308
30) LAD A.Miles (34): .296
31) MIN T.Nishioka (26): .

Even being generous and looking at his career numbers (and ignoring that he's been nowhere near those numbers for the last two seasons), he's still a well below average 2B, and surrounded on this list by dirt cheap replaceable vets mixed in with a few young promising players just starting their careers.

(I put in markers to break up the thoughts hear because I feel like i was so scattershot that it's hard to follow otherwise)

By WAR, Hill is behind both McDonald and Mike McCoy this season.

that's actually a wonderful illustration. The premis is "look at the numbers. Hill sucks more than anyone."

okay, so Hill is not as good as McCoy, by the numbers - if i said to you "over the next three years your 2B can be Aaron hill, at the contracted price, or mike McCoy pre-arbitration salaries included - which one do you want? Choose now."

How many of us here would be perfectly content to take McCoy?

Even if it were McDonald?

Maybe I'm wrong here but I'd love to see it polled because I think 2 of 3 would pick Hill.

*****

if we look at the last two years WAR per 150gms

Well if you do that you have to assume that this is who and what he is. that's possible. I recall Felipe Lopez once had an impressive year (compared to the career since) but it is making an assumption that might not be true.

I will freely admit that I am not as down on Hill as many are specifically BECAUSE I don't think this is "what he is" - in fact, for most of 2011 (in a tiny sample) that has not been what he is at all. Your "last two years" sample is really not 2 years, it's 170 games. And then when you consider that for the last 21 games he hasn't been anything like what he was in the previous 149 it's more stark still.

Over those 170 games, his OPS+ is 78.
Over his previous 373 games, it was 107.
(I really wish I could combine parts of seasons to get the OPS plus for the 149 games)

I think the latter is much closer to what he is than the former, although I'm open to the idea he's putting so much pressure on himself here he might need a change of scenery to get it back. that doesn't mean I think he's an all-star or anything. Looking at your list, I think the "real" Aaron Hill is probably worth about 3.5 or so

Another way one can see the flaw in that list - look at how highly Kelly Johnson ranks, then look at Johnson's numbers in 2011 Johnson is at 4.8 on your list and Hill is at 1.1 - is there even ONE person here who thinks Johnson is noticeably better AT ALL then hill, let alone 4 times more productive?

*****

Looking at that list, there are exactly 2 2B ranked above Hill that most anyone would consider a significant upgrade on Hill. I mean really, Clint Barmes?

*****

there's really no hyperbole from me here - aside from some of the dregs of the dregs, there's just many, many other better and cheaper options than Hill.

There are many CHEAPER options - and if you want to argue that in no way is he worth $8 million then that's a wildly different point and one probably no one would dispute - I wouldn't.

But "many many" BETTER options? No. Not remotely.

Even on your list three are only three and one of them isn't a 2B. Unless you want to build your case on the ver marginal difference in Hill and a Johnson or a Hudson (assuming you think they are even better, which I don't)

More to the point, we know that the Jays will never pick up Hill's $8m option next year.....so how much of a paycut will Hill be ready to accept?

IF he continued this year with an OPS in the 70's, he'll GET one whether he likes it or not. He might well be too proud to accept it here, but like Orlando Hudson before him, the wake-up call is coming.

I don't actually think he will continue at that level. As I pointed out earlier, he's had more mid-level work this year than he has abysmal work. He opened the season with two awful weeks.

*****

Thing is - he's done that before.

In 2006, this was his line as of May 6 (27 games):

99 AB, 18 H, 7 doubles, 0 homers, 7 RBI, 1 BB, .182/.194/.253/.447

Jays fandom was ADAMANT he be demoted because clearly he was a giant sucking failure and proof positive JP was a moron and he would never ever be anything but a failure.

After May 6 it went like this (128 games):

447/141, 21,6, 43, 41 - .315/.381/.416/.797

Now sure, he was 24. He might very well NOT do that again.

but does he have a better chance of doing so that Mike McCoy? than Clint Barmes? Than Jamey Carroll, Adam Kennedy, or Omar Infante?

In my view, the idea is so silly one shouldn't even have to ask the question - of COURSE he does.

Not that that possibility is worth $8 million, but I'm not disputing the value of the contract. The point is - assuming that because his OPS+ NOW, in late May, is 73 means it will be 73 in late September is a HUGE leap.  We don't have the information yet to decide if 2010 was the outlier or the new normal, but my guess is the former.

*****
His play doesn't justify a salary of more than a couple of mil, on a one or two year deal. Will he accept that? Because if he doesn't, there's no way we should be offering him more to stay...

The padres - hardly big spenders - committed $11.5 million to Hudson (who's essentially the same guy) last year and Hudson's 3 years older.

I think it's safe to say there's a $5-6 million per year market for Hill out there.

$8 million is too much, but not insanely too much in the current market.

****
because the players with similar performance the last couple of years

Again, players with similar performance to his ONE worst year ever. that's not an appropriate sample size to judge ANY player. if it was, we'd have given him $13 million (Dan Uggla money) after 2009.

you have not presented a "couple of years" sample size - you've selected 170 games.

*****
the players with similar performance the last couple of years can be had for peanuts,

Again, how many of us would roll the dice and give Clint Barmes "peanuts" instead of giving Hill $8 million and feel comfortable with the choice? in fact, how many of us would want to march on the RC and burn it to the ground if that happened? Why? Because we know full well the chance of getting above average work from hill is something like 10,000 times more likely than getting even average work from Barmes.

and then if we feel like spending there's a number of significantly better options as well.

Name them. the players for whom you would have to spend an impressive amount of money (at least $8 mil or more since that's Hill's salary) who can either play 2B, or push Escobar to 2B, and who are reasonably likely to be available.

I see one yes - Jose Reyes (and I'd be all for going for that) - and one maybe - Stephen Drew.

Who did I miss?

I'm not trying to be bitchy, I'm just saying "i wish we had a much better player (like Robinson Cano)" is all well and good, but it serves no purpose if it's not realistic to expect that player is actually out there and available.

I feel like the criticism of Hill is unrealisticly harsh (at least based on what we know so far) and that the optimisim for upgrading him is wildly unrealistic.

Even being generous and looking at his career numbers (and ignoring that he's been nowhere near those numbers for the last two seasons)

170 games. Really 149. A bad season plus an early season slump of the sort almost every hitter has at some point.

I don't know how to combine seasons in a sample set size on Fangraphs, not on other stats on BR when i combine 2006-2009 the results looked pretty much just like his 2006 results. I'm going to squint and suggest that somewhere in the low .340's is the wort of player he was on Opening Day 2010. Over a good sized sample set.

We're supposed to assume that the one season sample is more relevant than the three season sample? Yes, the career number is depressed because of that bad season but you can't assume that a career number is predictive, or that comparing it to others at different points in their career is instructive.

That said, to use your methods he was sitting in the top 10 before he had ONE BAD SEASON. Now he's sitting just behind Freddie Sanchez (who's making $6 mil per, btw) and Brandon Phillips (twice that), and just above Mark Ellis (wait for it...$6 mil)

Going down your list:

1) PHI C.Utley (32): .387 - not available
2) BOS D.Pedroia (27): .362 - not available
3) TEX I.Kinsler (29): .361- not available
4) NYY R.Cano (28): .356 - not available
5) MIL R.Weeks (28): .353 - not available
6) ATL D.Uggla (31): .353 - not available
7) ARI K.Johnson (29): .345 -
8) BAL B.Roberts (33): .343 - not available
9) TBR B.Zobrist (30): .342 - on a 5 yr deal, unlikely to be dealt
10) PIT N.Walker (25): .341 - likely unavailable
11) CHC J.Baker (30): .340 - marginal defender IIRC
12) SDP O.Hudson (33): .336 - three years older, not much production difference
13) LAA H.Kendrick* (27): .334 - not available
14) LAA M.Izturis* (29): .327
15) NYM D.Murphy (26): .327 - marginal defender
16) KCR M.Aviles (30): .327 - marginal defender IIRC
17) CIN B.Phillips (30): .326 - not available
18) SFG F.Sanchez (33): .326 - not available (just extended)
19) TOR A.Hill (29): .325

I trust I don't have to detail why we shouldn't give up prospects to switch off to a Schumaker (or worse)

In fact, the more I look at this the more i wonder if it wouldn't be worth marginally overpaying Hill just to avoid having to settle for someone like Barmes. I'm convinced, since we've already seen that AA plays a monetary value on a prospect, that he would take into account the value of the prospects he had to trade in order to replace Hill with, for instance, Beckham and find the cost prohibitive.

A discussion amongst Mets fans about some Blue Jay prospects on a NY Giants board. Intersting take on what they think of some of our guys.

Reminds me why I don't miss most discussion boards.

I think Zach Stewart and Gus Pierrie maybe? lol

Tamra, I'm a bit boggled by the conclusions you drew there.

- Remember, that career wOBA list casts Hill in the best possible light - and he still comes off looking poor. The reality is that he's been nowhere remotely close to that career number for a long time now. You put together his below average career numbers with his absolutely abysmal performance the last two seasons, and you get a very poor player no matter which way we slice it.

- I don't think you should be dismissing 10+ point gaps in career wOBA as "not a big difference", because it's quite a bit difference.

- you can't dismiss other players as "marginal defensively" when Hill has been average at best defensively ever since returning from that concussion.


the numbers show pretty clearly that Hill can be replaced for peanuts, IMO. and if he's not willing to accept peanuts, then he definitely should be let go.

Tonight's lineup:

escobar 6
patterson 7
bautista 9
rivera 3
arencibia 2
hill 4
davis 8
molina dh
nix 5

Yikes. If Encarnacion isn't a better DH option than Jose Ben, isn't it time to send him packing?

I suppose Farrell is looking at batter vs pitcher history - Molina is 6 of 18 with a homer and 2 walks off Buehrle. EE has never faced him.

And it's also interesting that Farrell evidently believes that Arencibia is his best defensive catcher (or that Drabek works better with Arencibia). I like it.

I would just like to hear one good reason as to why Patterson is batting 2nd, right in front of Bautista. Davis can't lead off because his speed he is less of a threat on the base paths with Bautista at the plate, but Patterson is allowed to hit 2nd? Escobar-Bautista-Arencibia-Rivera is what the first 4 should be, and then Escobar-Bautista-Arencibia-Lind-Rivera (or flip Rivera and Arencibia) when Lind gets back. Lineup construction is one of the easiest parts of the job, as I see it, and so many managers do it so foolishly.

Patterson is batting 2nd because the Jays don't really have a #2 hitter or a #4 hitter.  They have Jose Bautista, Yunel Escobar, Arencibia (who is hitting in the 5 slot to keep the pressure off somewhat) and a bunch of players who should be hitting at the bottom of the order.  Farrell apparently doesn't like to switch the lineup around too much depending on the handedness of the opposing pitcher; otherwise you'd want somebody other than Patterson at the top of the lineup against a leftie. 

All of this will change soon. This season feels a little bit like Waiting for Godot.

I assume Molina will catch tomorrow, day game after a night game.

Davis should replace Patterson up at the top of the order, really.

Davis has a .351obp and .749ops since returning from injury. Patterson hasn't completely sucked this month (.714ops), but his OBP is still barely over .300 and he should be dropped.

The reality is that he's been nowhere remotely close to that career number for a long time now. You put together his below average career numbers with his absolutely abysmal performance the last two seasons, and you get a very poor player no matter which way we slice it.

the career number is that low BECAUSE of the recent bad work - putting them together as you do in this comment is double counting the bad work.

I don't think you should be dismissing 10+ point gaps in career wOBA as "not a big difference", because it's quite a bit difference.

did i do that?

you can't dismiss other players as "marginal defensively" when Hill has been average at best defensively ever since returning from that concussion.

That's an opinion that's in dispute. I'm not qualified necessarily to take a side.

Also - you are still repeating "two years" to support your claim when there is no two years of bad work.

In other news EE has a bad toe and Johnny Mc a bad hamstring so Eric Thames is the bench tonight.

Is it unseemly to root for Arencibia to homer his first two times up, then get ejected sometime in the fifth inning?

the career number is that low BECAUSE of the recent bad work - putting them together as you do in this comment is double counting the bad work

it's not double counting.

If two players both have a .325 career wOBA, yet Player A has been hitting well above that for the last two seasons, while Player B has been hitting well below that for the last two seasons, you obviously prefer Player A, because recent performance obviously counts much more than past performance.

B.Phillips: .326woba career (.357 '11, .332 '10)

A.Hill: .325woba career (.284 '11, .291 '10)

Phillips is the much preferable player, despite the similarity in career numbers.

J.Bautista: .358woba career (.530woba '11, .422woba '10)

N.Markakis: .358woba career (.301woba '11, .353woba '10)

We take Bautista.

You don't ignore the recent numbers - those are the most important ones. I'm not double counting them, you're actually "double ignoring" them.

According to mlbtraderumors, Joe Inglett has been released..

Hmm. Left-handed hitter, lifetime 734 OPS (although OPS+ of around 36 this year), pretty much free for the taking.. Could at least be a pinch-runner/platoon-mate for Nix?

Patterson is batting 2nd because the Jays don't really have a #2 hitter or a #4 hitter.  They have Jose Bautista, Yunel Escobar, Arencibia (who is hitting in the 5 slot to keep the pressure off somewhat) and a bunch of players who should be hitting at the bottom of the order.  Farrell apparently doesn't like to switch the lineup around too much depending on the handedness of the opposing pitcher; otherwise you'd want somebody other than Patterson at the top of the lineup against a leftie.

This year, Patterson has been killing lefties.

I'm guessing the reason Davis is not leading is because he hasn't gotten on base much when leading.

I like the lineup stacked with right handed bats, I don't like the runners stranded  at third with less than one out.