Batter's Box Interactive Magazine - Odds and Ends and Ortiz's

Game 6 of the World Series now goes Thursday night, with Game-Seven-If-Necessary to follow on Friday.

Elsewhere...

...the Jays are reportedly not not interested in David Ortiz. The exact formulation in this case is "will not rule out," which, duh, I mean if I were Alex Anthopoulos I wouldn't rule out interest in anyone short of Babe Ruth (because he's no longer with us.) I don't imagine Ortiz is going to be super interested in signing for less than what he makes now, $12.5 million, and I'm sure multiple years would be nice. Papi has been good the last two years, but the market for 37 year old DHs can't be more than about five or six teams. So it's not immediately evident what he'll get paid, but lets say he's available for two years, $25 million.

On some levels signing him does make sense for Toronto, as Ortiz has the potential to be a very good hitter. The only thing is that it probably wouldn't move the needle very much. The team received a cumulative line of .262/.338/.432 from its DHs, and while Ortiz did hit a superb .309/.398/.554 this past year you would expect him to regress some. The team has Edwin Encarnacion on option for $3.5 million next year, and he probably won't be significantly worse than Ortiz (he is eight years younger and hit slightly better than that DH line this past year.) If Ortiz is worth 2.5 more wins than Encarnacion next year (about what the difference was this year; I think this is a bit generous), that is about the $9 million difference in their salaries. But the Jays moving from an 81 to 83 win team isn't worth much of anything, so the only real way this deal makes sense for Toronto is if they improve elsewhere as well. If the Jays, for argument's sake, sign Prince Fielder and CJ Wilson, they are probably improving by 10 wins off the bat next year, without getting into who might regress or progress. In that case it would make sense to sign Ortiz, but in that case the Jays probably don't have a spare $10 million lying around. So, I don't really see a scenario in which Ortiz signs with Toronto. Which isn't to say it won't happen, just that I don't know that there is a logical path to it happening.

Also in Red Sox mode, after recently stating that the team would give employees permission to speak with other ball clubs (no link, pretty sure it was the Globe), AA has reversed course and now says that they will not allow lateral moves [per MLBTR, albeit with no link, though I believe others, including Bob Elliot, have reported it.] I think this is the right decision, as what is the point of having an employee under contract if they can just go to another organization at their choosing. Imagine if the club let Jose Bautista do that... In any case, if the Red Sox really want John Farrell then the Jays should by all rights demand an arm and a leg. And if they got it, I would be fine with letting him go. It's in bad form a bit, I suppose, and the team would have to find a new manager, but I am reasonably confident that if the team got any sort of real players/prospects back from the Red Sox that their value would be greater than the value of Farrell over another manager. I think good managers can have a big affect, but it's not immediately clear that Farrell was a good manager (to be fair, it was his first year and I think he improved.) There are a lot of smart people out there that want to manage though, like, say, Terry Francona (maybe,) and I'm sure they would be quite happy to take the Blue Jays money. Anyway, Boston is a smart organization too, and I doubt they will spend to get Farrell from Toronto, so I guess this is a dead story.

Discuss amongst yourselves.

Posted by Anders on Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 12:42 AM EDT.

Odds and Ends and Ortiz's | 47 comments | Create New Account

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

The_Game - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 05:18 AM EDT (#246064) #

It's not the upgrade from EE to Ortiz that you should solely be looking at. Acquiring Ortiz for DH would conceivably create a platoon at 1B (assuming no other changes), which would be much more successful than Adam Lind flailing away against lefties for a 3rd consecutive sub-.300 OBP season.

Lind career OPS vs. RHP: .842
Lind career OPS vs. LHP: .615

Encarnacion career OPS vs. RHP: .768
Encarnacion career OPS vs. LHP: .847

Of course, I wouldn't be against the team trading Lind away altogether, but that may be a bit difficult. In any case, the Jays should be trying anything to get Adam Lind out of a full-time starting role next season, he doesn't deserve one.

Anders - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 09:06 AM EDT (#246066) #

Ah yes, the platoon. I am a big fan of the platoon, I would love it if the Jays platooned, but it seems like nobody ever really all out commits to it these days - I'm sure Magpie could expand on this point in greater detail.

And of course Lind and Encarnacion could just as easily platoon at DH as at first, though there are a paucity of first basemen out there.

Still, I would be surprised if this happened. I don't think the Jays would pick up Encarnacion's option so that he could get 200 at bats against lefties. With Lawrie at third and Ortiz at DH there would be nowhere else for him to play. It would also commit the Jays to ~$20 million between first and DH for having no real marquee players (partial credit only for Ortiz.) I'm not sure the club spends this money unless they get better in another area as well. Then again a Lind/Encarnacion combo might replicate 75% of Prince Fielder's value at 35% of the price. Something like signing CJ WIlson and Ortiz and platooning Lind and Encarnacion would probably put the Jays close to 90 wins in a vacuum, I could get on board with that.

Chuck - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 10:44 AM EDT (#246068) #

I am a big fan of the platoon, I would love it if the Jays platooned, but it seems like nobody ever really all out commits to it these days

Isn't this simply a function of the short benches teams carry nowadays to accommodate a 7-man bullpen? There used to be a living to be made thumping lefties and doing little else (a la John Wockenfuss). These days, bench players are more coveted for the number of positions they can play (a la Willie Bloomquist) rather than actually being really good at any one thing.

Mike Green - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 10:53 AM EDT (#246069) #

That is true, but in the case of Lind/Encarnacion/Ortiz, the formulation would probably provide adequate backup at first and third, bearing in mind that Bautista can also play third. Lind, Encarnacion, Ortiz, 2 catchers, Kelly Johnson (say), Escobar, a middle infield backup, Lawrie and 4 outfielders would make 13 position players, and accommodate a 7 man bullpen if you were determined to go that way.

I am not at all saying that Ortiz would be the best option, but merely depending on the financial demands for the other possible improvements, he does offer a way to improve the ballclub at less cost (possibly). The only real reason to not consider him is if you believe that he is likely to regress a lot and will not offer good value.

Ron - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 12:39 PM EDT (#246071) #

The last time the Jays attempted and successfully signed an old (mid to late 30's) DH coming off a huge season to a multi-year deal turned out to be a disaster. Ortiz is coming off a huge season but I prefer the other fat slugger that is almost a decade younger (and will be a lot more expensive).

The_Game - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 12:43 PM EDT (#246072) #

Encarnacion would be a great platoon/bench player at his cheap price and there are always injuries. In fact, with the way style that Brett Lawrie plays, I would actually expect 3B to be open at some point (and yes, I'd rather have EE fill in there than bring in somebody like Jayson Nix again).

The_Game - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 12:53 PM EDT (#246073) #

Joe Maddon has run platoons with the Rays each season for a while now. I've always assumed that was at least part of the reason why he is able to get as much offense as he does out of that group.

I miss the Gibbons days here, when he successfully used Cat/Johnson in LF for years and attempted to play Hinske/Rios in RF (before a motivated Alex Rios became the best position player on the team).

John Northey - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 01:06 PM EDT (#246075) #

My first thought when Ortiz is mentioned is Frank Thomas.

Thomas came here at age 39 for 2-3 years (3rd year a vesting option). At 39 he has a 125 OPS+ which he was lower than just twice before in his career (a 20 game injury season and the one after it with a 118). He hit for a 72 OPS+ the next year over 16 games before the Jays cut bait. Oakland took him in and he hit for a 105 over 55 games before calling it quits.

Ortiz is entering his age 36 season, so a bit younger. He had a 154 OPS+ last year, much like Frank had a rebound year just before signing (140). He was at just 101 in 2009, but 137 in 2010. I sure wouldn't want to bet $10 million+ a year over 2 years to him though. 1 year for $10? Maybe if the feeling was there was no other reasonable way to cover DH but that'd be it. Fangraphs has Ortiz at $10+ just twice in the past 4 years (both 2010 and 2011). $10.4 in 2010, $18.8 last year. A general rule is not to outbid what Fangraphs suggests as they tend to be a bit high.

Prince, on the other hand, has been over $20 3 of the past 5 years, over $10 mil 4 of the past 5. Still, he has cracked $25 just once (2009) so going that high on a contract would be a mistake. $20 mil a year is reasonable as he has averaged $19.1 a year over the past 5 and he is in his prime at the moment. IMO, going over 5 years or up to $25 million a year would be a mistake (vesting options or team options are OK though).

bball12 - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 01:14 PM EDT (#246076) #

I think the Jays can survive without picking up yet another old - one dimensional player - at an exhorbitant cost no less.

I wouldnt even consider it - unless he offered to play for free.

92-93 - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 01:20 PM EDT (#246077) #

.250/.342/.473 - Ortiz away from Fenway, 2008-2010
.273/.357/.518 - Ortiz away from Fenway, 2011

Those are the #s I'd look at when evaluating Ortiz, not his seasonal lines. He's always mashed at Fenway. Of course those are still solid numbers, but they're essentially what you'd get if you platooned Lind with Encarnacion.

Anyway, Ortiz is a Type A so unless the Jays are signing another one I can't see them surrendering a draft pick to sign him.

smcs - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 01:52 PM EDT (#246079) #

I miss the Gibbons days here, when he successfully used Cat/Johnson in LF for years and attempted to play Hinske/Rios in RF (before a motivated Alex Rios became the best position player on the team).

That was partly done because the Jays just had too many guys. At the start of 2005, the Jays had Hinske, Hillenbrand and Koskie flipping around 1B, 3B and DH (though Hillenbrand was the only one to play all three), then Koskie got hurt and Aaron Hill sort of blew in the back door. At the start of 2006, the Jays had Overbay, Glaus and Hillenbrand at 1B, 3B and DH, Wells in CF, Hill and Adams up the middle, and four productive bats to play two positions. By the end of April, Rios had taken over RF, and Freed Johnalanotto rode on til Rios' injury and infection and Hillenbrand's dismissal. Gibby wanted to keep the platoons rolling but injuries kind of took over.

Mike Green - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 02:07 PM EDT (#246080) #

The fangraphs' profile of Ortiz tells an interesting story about his 2011 season. At age 35, his K rate was at a career low. Strangely, he swung at more pitches out of the zone and fewer pitches in the zone, but made a lot more contact with both, but still hit for about the same IsoP close to his career average. When Frank Thomas had his big years in 2003 and 2006, he did it by basically replicating his career averages (actually a smidge worse) in W and K and having big IsoP years.

I like what Ortiz did, and, if healthy, I am reasonably confident that he could more or less sustain it. However, one cannot feel comfortable with the likelihood that any 36 year old will be healthy for most of the next 2 years. It all depends on the dollars and the cost of other options.

The_Game - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 03:10 PM EDT (#246081) #

.250/.342/.473 - Ortiz away from Fenway, 2008-2010
.273/.357/.518 - Ortiz away from Fenway, 2011

.270/.357/.597- Ortiz's career at the Rogers Centre

Anyway, Ortiz is a Type A so unless the Jays are signing another one I can't see them surrendering a draft pick to sign him.

You're assuming Boston offers him arbitration. They may not.

MatO - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 03:46 PM EDT (#246082) #

Interview with Jacob Anderson

http://jaysprospects.com/2011/10/27/interview-with-jacob-anderson-the-blue-jays-top-signee-from-the-2011-draft/#more-3414

Forkball - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 03:59 PM EDT (#246083) #

You're assuming Boston offers him arbitration. They may not.

Why would you not offer arbitration to a productive player when you don't have a replacement? A one year deal is probably the ideal scenario for Boston.

Not to mention AA said they wouldn't be making a splash in FA so I think this doesn't have any legs.

Shaker - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 04:35 PM EDT (#246085) #

The simplest way to upgrade our offence is to move Lind down in the order and bring in a proper cleanup hitter to complement/protect Bautista.

A left handed bat is preferable and there are quite a few options, from Prince and Votto at the high end to Carlos Pena and Kendrys Morales at the lower end.

Anyone who is better than Lind improves the lineup. As Texas has shown with their bench of Young, Napoli and Murphy, depth is very important. It's probably best to think of this DH/1B signing as a team signing, rather than a discreet event. By that I mean, you can decline signing a cleanup hitter because the value of the FA may be lower than the cost, but the Jays have a low team salary and can afford to add cost to improve the team. Does the heart of the order need improving? Yes it does. Do they have the financial capacity to improve it? Yes they do. Should they do it now? Of course, can't think of a reason why not.

In my mind, Prince's D isn't worth a 9-figure commitment, so I don't really consider him a fit. Votto would be great as has been discussed as nauseum. Papi seems realistic "IF" Boston doesn't have room for him anymore. He'd only take a 2 year commitment, so you couldn't really damage the franchise by signing him to a $25M (or less) deal.

A step down from Ortiz would be Carlos Pena. Carlos can't hit LHP, but EE can, so it's not that big a deal. I don't know whether Pena would take a short term deal but he should cost less than Papi. The difference between Pena and Lind could be debated but I like his OBP advantage.

If you sign one of those 2 sluggers it leaves you prospects to trade for a starting pitcher.
On the other hand, if you can't sign one of those 2 then you probably have to sign a FA pitcher (to improve the club) and then trade for a cleanup hitter like Kendrys or LoMo.

It's time to make those improvements. The talent is there, the money is there and the fans will be there, too.

Mick Doherty - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 04:41 PM EDT (#246086) #

As Texas has shown with their bench of Young, Napoli and Murphy, depth is very important.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding what you mean here, but the three guys you name combined for 1,561 plate appearances in 2011 and all are seeing regular time in the post-season (with two having started every game). Can't really call them "bench" players!

Shaker - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 04:44 PM EDT (#246087) #

That is my point, Mick!

Glevin - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 05:31 PM EDT (#246089) #

"The difference between Pena and Lind could be debated but I like his OBP advantage."

Pena is pretty clearly better but Lind at 27 and Pena at 33 makes a difference. Plus, if Pena came, you'd have to listen to everyone talk about how his bad batting average and high K numbers make him a bad hitter.

The_Game - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 08:20 PM EDT (#246091) #

Why would you not offer arbitration to a productive player when you don't have a replacement? A one year deal is probably the ideal scenario for Boston.

Maybe. But they might not want to give the guy a potential raise that he likely won't be worth. Not doing so would also allow them to enter the Pujols/Fielder sweepstakes or sign a lesser DH at a more reasonable price.

Not to mention AA said they wouldn't be making a splash in FA so I think this doesn't have any legs.

They're also a team that is reportedly considering spending 100+M on a NPB pitcher. $10M for Ortiz would be a drop in the bucket considering that.

The_Game - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 08:23 PM EDT (#246092) #

Pena is pretty clearly better but Lind at 27 and Pena at 33 makes a difference. Plus, if Pena came, you'd have to listen to everyone talk about how his bad batting average and high K numbers make him a bad hitter.

Anything to get Lind out before he posts another one of his replacement level seasons.

Richard S.S. - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 09:54 PM EDT (#246095) #

Adam Lind is under contract for 2012 & 2013, before options for 2014, 2015 and 2016 set in. The Contract is very team-friendly. Adam Lind found out how truly out of shape he was. I think banishing him into a platoon with E.E. is premature, no matter how much sense it makes. Edwin Encarnacion has not been consistently that good, usually having a poor spring (April & May). The '84 Tigers under Sparky Anderson went 35 - 5 in their first 40 games. Good starts to the season are critcal.

A platoon means a 6-man Bullpen or a light bench. A.A.'s pitching aquisitions now become very significant. Besides a front-of-the-rotation Starter and a bona fide Closer, A.A. will need another top Starter as well as another top Reliever to make a Platoon work.

C.J. Wilson doesn't pitch well in the post season so his value has dropped (small samples matter). Is he an A.A. target? We'll have to wait and see. I like the Ortiz possibility, he can hit well here, a good aquisition. I don't see any reason for A.A. to not have a $100+ Million payroll. This http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2011/10/offseason-outlook-toronto-blue-jays.html indicates A.A will have a lot of money available this offseason.

BlueJayWay - Thursday, October 27 2011 @ 10:26 PM EDT (#246096) #

It's not so much that Lind is bad against lefties (tho is is very bad), but that he's just not a good hitter for a 1B. You're talking about a guy with a career .316 OBP. That's hideous. And that includes a season in which he on based .370. He's a hacker and an out machine. The Jays can do better, I think.

92-93 - Friday, October 28 2011 @ 03:48 PM EDT (#246128) #

Not so sure how team friendly the Lind contract is (and I didn't think it was all that team friendly when they signed it either). I wonder if AA would even tender him a contract this offseason if he didn't have the extension. It's quite possible the front office has soured on his long term future but is hamstrung by the fact he's guaranteed 2/10m.

Shaker - Friday, October 28 2011 @ 05:48 PM EDT (#246132) #

On July 27, after 3 months of playing, Adam Lind was hitting .290/.343/.506. From there he went 0 for 21 and was never good again in the final 2 months. It has been explained as a back injury.

From 2008 through 2010, in over 1300 PAs, Adam Lind put up a slash of .283/.342/.587 vs RHP. You should assume his 2011 vs RHP was even better than his numbers above. Adam Lind can't hit LHP but EE can.

Adam Lind is a very good power hitter against right handed pitching. His contract is reasonable. Moving him down in the order and replacing him in the cleanup spot with a better hitter gives us a formidable lineup.

Richard S.S. - Saturday, October 29 2011 @ 02:06 AM EDT (#246138) #

Do you offer Prince Fielder (27 years old until May 9th, 2012) 4 years and $100.0 Million contract, with the chance of an even bigger payday at age 31, the 2015/16 Offseason? I would. He would be 5 months younger (at that time) than Albert Pujols is now, with a good chance of a bigger deal. Adam Lind could play some 1B, some DH, some LF.

To put it into perspective, Jose Bautista (age: 35) would be bought out, or going into his Option year; Adam Lind (age: 32) would either no longer be a Blue Jay, or going into his 3rd Option year; Ricky Romero (age: 31) would be bought out, or going into his Option year. It's possible, Fielder might need 5 years and $125.0 Million; 6 years and $150.0 Million; or 7 years and $175.0 Million, with 1 - 3 Option years. Why not?

Paul Beeston spoke on Prime Time Sports http://www.fan590.com/media.jsp?content=20111028_163927_9960 , and he was opposed to 8, 9 and 10-year contracts (but maybe not 5, 6 and 7-year contracts). He spoke, as legally as he could (to avoid tampering charges), about David Ortiz and Prince Fielder. Adam Lind could be LF with some 1B and some DH.

As for costs, this site http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2011/10/offseason-outlook-toronto-blue-jays.html does a good job with that. Fielder, Ortiz, a front-of-the-rotation Starter and a bona fide Closer, with the other pieces needed, will put this team into the Postseason. The Prospects get another year to develop; another Draft Class and International signings to add to the minors will ensure continuity. Starter, Closer, and only one Big Bat, with 2B and bench decisions, will also put us there. We'll just have to see.

This http://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2011/10/free-agency-period-will-begin-october-30th-1.html could change it all.

dawgatc - Saturday, October 29 2011 @ 12:13 PM EDT (#246145) #

The Jays have lots of good young outfielders - Gose,Marisnick etc. - Save 1st base for Bautista and backfill with your young of's.Spend the money on young players.Let Prince go wreck his knees with someone else.

StephenT - Saturday, October 29 2011 @ 01:40 PM EDT (#246148) #

Wouldn't it be shocking if the Jays picked up EE's option?

If Snider is going to play LF, then you already have Thames, Cooper and Loewen competing for DH at bats, not to mention a possibly hot-hitting catcher who can't catch every day, and other bats who need time off from the field.

John Northey - Saturday, October 29 2011 @ 02:48 PM EDT (#246150) #

The trick with EE is he hits right handed while Thames, Cooper, Loewen, Lind and Snider are all lefties.

Magpie - Saturday, October 29 2011 @ 04:49 PM EDT (#246153) #

Do you offer Prince Fielder (27 years old until May 9th, 2012) 4 years and $100.0 Million contract, with the chance of an even bigger payday at age 31,

You can offer it. What the hell. You can also call spirits from the vasty deep. Doesn't mean they'll actually come when you call.

Certainly, in view of what had become of his dad, Frank Thomas, and Mo Vaughn by the time they had turned 31, Prince would be well advised to get as big and as long a deal as he can right now.

bpoz - Saturday, October 29 2011 @ 04:57 PM EDT (#246154) #

Wilner had his Blue Jay a day guest during the playoffs. I missed some of the guests entirely and only got parts of others. Any comments from those Bauxites that listened.

My impressions of those whom I heard and can still remember:

J Bautista & Romero I thought played it safe. No damage control needed. Actually a caller asked Bautista a hard question about Toronto culture or something, I was so impressed by Bautistas intelligent, thoughtful answer.
Janssen was shy & very soft spoken, not at all like the great competitor he is.
Litsch only had about 20 minutes because AA came on. Wilner did a great job of leading Litsch in the chat. Pitchers defense came up, Litsch was a 3B in college and prides himself on his great fielding.

Lawrie was a real treat. He gave long detailed answers to questions from callers. I was very impressed by his speaking abilities. Big news to me was that Lawrie takes it upon himself to pump up the team before games. One example he gave was having a team mate throw a paper cup of water in his face to loosen up everyone. So there is craziness of youth and the way he spoke, this team will never give up. Strangely each minor league team is not necessarily their/his team, the players are his team mates but as each player improves enough they get moved up to another team.

I am not sure, but I do not think AA was invited, I think that came as a surprise to Wilner.IMO I don't think any of the Toronto media can pin AA down. With a time limit on any interview, AA can talk on & on an so kill the clock or control it however he likes. Wilner did not say a lot.

Position players were discussed, only catcher really when Wilner asked about evaluating the Napoli trade. AA said it is a fair question and he would never shy away from tough questions. Napoli had a great year FF did not have a great year. JPA had to play, especially with d'Arnaud being so close behind him & then Jimenez. Commitments were made to Lind & EE. I wonder if 3 experienced guys like Napoli, Lind & EE can all get enough ABs to have a good season. AA also said he would have asked for more if he had known how good a year Napoli was going to have,

AA did mention SPs, we have the 5 we ended the season with, 4 in NH & Drabek. Litsch will go to the pen, but will be stretched out in ST. So I count 11 potential SPs, 3 of which will not be on the 40 man AND I know that you cannot find ST innings for so many SPs. AA and his staff also recognize that some pitchers make up for their lack in stuff with fierce competitiveness.

MatO - Saturday, October 29 2011 @ 05:49 PM EDT (#246157) #

in view of what had become of his dad, Frank Thomas, and Mo Vaughn by the time they had turned 31

Not sure why Thomas is included. OPS+ ages 31-35: 125, 163, hurt, 118 and 146. Ages 36 and 37 he was hurt a lot but was great when he did play. Ages 38 and 39: OPS+ 140 and 125. Age 40:done.

Richard S.S. - Saturday, October 29 2011 @ 06:14 PM EDT (#246158) #

Magpie, I disagree.

Frank Thomas (6'5" 240-275) http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/t/thomafr04.shtml had health concerns (ankles) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Thomas_(designated_hitter) for most of his career, resulting in playing a lot of DH. He had good years, ages: 23-30, 31 (hurt), 32, 34, 35, 38 and 39. He was washed up at age 40. He is not a fair comparison to Prince Fielder.

Mo Vaughn (6'1" 225) http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/v/vaughmo01.shtml was injured http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mo_Vaughn in 1999 (ankle) and missed the entire 2001 season. He had good years, ages: 25-32. He was washed up at age 35. He is not a fair comparison to Prince Fielder.

Cecil Fielder (6'3" 230 +) http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/f/fieldce01.shtml was not in the best shape he could be during his career http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cecil_Fielder playing DH later in his career. He had good years, ages: 25-32. He was washed up at age 34. He is not a fair comparison to Prince Fielder.

Prince Fielder (5`11`275) http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/f/fieldpr01.shtml has been in good shape and healthy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Fielder thus fair in his career, playing exclusively 1B thus far. He is having good years thus far, ages: 22-27. He is seeking a multi-year mega-bucks deal.

Mike Green - Saturday, October 29 2011 @ 06:42 PM EDT (#246159) #

I agree with Mat. Frank Thomas was an all-time great hitter (which Prince is not), who had a fairly typical decline, and was accordingly fairly productive in his 30s. You can go from a 183 OPS+ hitter to a 145 OPS+ hitter and still be very good (that would be Frank). If Prince declined at the same rate, you would be paying a lot of money for ho-hum player. It may be that Prince can do better in holding his value. He does move better than Thomas did, and he does eat spinach.

Magpie - Sunday, October 30 2011 @ 12:09 AM EDT (#246160) #

He is not a fair comparison to Prince Fielder.

You really, really need to wait and see where Prince is at when he's 35 before you say that.

As for Big Frank, after never having an OPS+ below 174 in his 20s, upon hitting age 30 he immediately fell a considerable distance, down to the mid 120s (which ain't chopped liver, I admit.). He bounced back to some degree, mixing in an outstanding seasons at age 32 and another at age 35. He was never anything less than a productive hitter. But he wasn't exactly Jimmie Foxx Mark Two anymore either.

Magpie - Sunday, October 30 2011 @ 12:11 AM EDT (#246161) #

Cecil Fielder (6'3" 230)

That's a good one. And when he put his other foot on the scale, it read...

Magpie - Sunday, October 30 2011 @ 12:21 AM EDT (#246162) #

Anyway, guys like that Big Hurt, Vaughn, and Daddy Fielder are the only possible comparison to Fielder. Frank Howard, too, I suppose. Boog Powell. Ryan Howard. Before you think about investing $150 million dollars and seven years on the guy - how does this type of player age? One dimensional sluggers who carry a truly enormous amount of poundage. What becomes of their knees and ankles after they turn 30?

Richard S.S. - Sunday, October 30 2011 @ 02:37 AM EDT (#246164) #

... how does this type of player age?...

As long as they are fit, they age very well. When they are no longer fit, they fade fast. Give him 4 years at $25.0 - $30.0 Million per year (we can afford it) and at age 31, let someone else worry about it. As long as Fielder is playing for a contract, he'll keep fit.

David Ortiz http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/o/ortizda01.shtml had good years, ages 26-35. Prior to that, not so much. He played as mostly a DH and still had injury problems throughout his career. Jim Thome http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/t/thomeji01.shtml had good years, ages 24-33, and 35-38. After that, not so much. He had injury problems most of his career.

Which is more of a hitters park, Milwaukee or Toronto? At this point in time, he can still play 1B, even though, never very well. Guys with these kind of power numbers don't exist in our minors, they're hard to develop and maybe never will occur.

Besides, A.A.'s main task is Pitching, Pitching, Pitching, Pitching, 2B, Bench.

Magpie - Sunday, October 30 2011 @ 02:40 AM EDT (#246165) #

Since when does Jim Thome weigh 270 pounds? Which is kind of my whole point.

Chuck - Sunday, October 30 2011 @ 08:02 AM EDT (#246168) #

As long as they are fit, they age very well.

Isn't that the point? If Prince Fielder really is 5'11" and 275 lbs, can that be called fit?

Mike Green - Sunday, October 30 2011 @ 10:52 AM EDT (#246169) #

Prince is definitely not a one-dimensional slugger! He will take a walk.

If you believe BBRef's #s, there really is no comparable to Prince. Mo Vaughn was a svelte 6'2", 225. Frank Howard was 6'7", 275. Willie Stargell was a lean and mean 6'2", 188 lbs. Big Daddy we've covered. When I ran a play index asking for players weighing 250 lbs. or more who had hit 10 homers between age 25 and 27, there were only 10 players, with Lucas Duda at 6'4', 255 being the latest. There may be some truth in all of this. Maybe Willie Stargell was 188 lbs when he arrived in the big leagues. Maybe Cecil Fielder was 230 lbs. at age 21. Maybe Mo Vaughn was 225 lbs when he first went on the diamond. Prince was outsized from the time he was 12, and was huge when he arrived. It may be that he has not picked up any weight since then, and that what has derailed the careers of so many big men is that they picked up weight that they could not afford to after they arrived in the majors. That was certainly true of Mo Vaughn.

When Travis Snider was drafted, many doubted his abilities because of his weight and height and indicated that there was no way he would be an outfielder at age 27 as he would add more weight to his already significant frame. That has turned out to be the least of Travis' issues.

BlueJayWay - Sunday, October 30 2011 @ 11:46 AM EDT (#246170) #

I think Fielder's age is an important factor here. He is quite young for a free agent so it's not like we'd be getting him for declining years, most likely. He's a bit younger than Adam Lind, for comparison. I woulnd't want Prince at age 34+, but if we have him at ages 28,29,30,31 I'd say go for it.

I doubt anyone gives him 8 or 10 years.

electric carrot - Sunday, October 30 2011 @ 12:31 PM EDT (#246171) #

I understand and appreciate the thinking that reveals all the problems that Fielder presents in any multi-year contract. But I think these are the years where the Jays could be legit force in the East. It makes sense to me that this is the time when you have to pay for the here and now even if it presents much potential for suffering in the not too distant future. There's lots of evidence out there that you have to pay to play -- especially in the East. Risky multi-year deals are clearly a part of that price whether that's Fielder or Darvish or both. I'd like to have both.

Shaker - Sunday, October 30 2011 @ 04:49 PM EDT (#246174) #

Prince's defense isn't good enough to pay him the contract he will be seeking (and will get). The Jays should pass on Fielder, unless his contract is representative of what a great DH would be paid.

Starting pitching is more important to the Jays right now and there are other avenues to finding a very good cleanup hitter.

AWeb - Sunday, October 30 2011 @ 09:44 PM EDT (#246175) #

The Yankees have many contracts that aren't worth the back-end (Jeter, Rodriguez, Texiera, probably Sabathia once he signs there for 7 more years or something). The Red Sox have the same (Crawford, Lackey, Matzusaka (is he done yet?)). If the Blue Jays have payroll flexibility, part of the nature of being a big spender is that you have to take your chances on long-term contracts. Top-five position players (Pujols, Fielder, Reyes) do not sign short deals, they sign long-term, big money deals. There are not sure thing players in 5 years, especially among free agents. If the Jays can be creative and upgrade without signing a long term big deal to someone like Fielder, that's the best case scenario. But it's also unlikely - I'm not losing sleep over the Jays signing a 6-7 year deal that probably will stink the last two years, as long as it projects well for the next 2-3 years. You can always offload contracts later, but don't try to maximize wins/$, just maximize wins.

Richard S.S. - Monday, October 31 2011 @ 04:52 AM EDT (#246177) #

A.A. may have to learn how to be a Big-Spending GM. Everything else, he's got figured out.

A.A. needs a Front-Of-The-Rotation Starter, so this will be of course, interest in whom this would be. A.A. needs a bona fide Closer, so there will be of course, interest in whom this might be. There will be interest in which other relievers he acquires. The acquisitions of 2B and the Bench will also generate interest. This will also generate great comment and debate.

IMO, I have doubts as to whether or not A.A. goes after Pujols, Fielder, Ortiz or another Big Bat. BUT, IMO, Prince Fielder just might take an offer of 4 years, $100.0 - $120.0 Million and try for another Big Contract at age 31, after he finds out what else is offered.

Let the fun begin.

Anonymous - Tuesday, November 22 2011 @ 06:09 PM EST (#247141) #

Game 6... WOW! Game 7... even more WOW!!! I loved this year's series and cannot wait for next season with the addition of an extra playoff teams. I have a good feeling I'll be cheering for the Jays in the post season really soon! That will give me a reason to get the guys together and head out to one of the Montreal restaurants near where we live to watch the game and cheer on my team. Do you all watch the games at home or in a public setting?

Odds and Ends and Ortiz's | 47 comments | Create New Account

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