how the heck did he lose? that's crazy.

Was I ever wrong about the Donaldson arbitration!...Just add it to a long list of things i have said that turned out to be wildly wrong.  Lesson:  the arbitrators have either a very restricted definition of a special talent within the meaning of the CBA or they are old and uninformed and have a limited understanding of what constitutes value ("the Ryan Howard effect" you might call it).  My money is on #2, but I could certainly be wrong about that too. 

On the other hand, I was right about Marcus Stroman.  The link is to Jeff Sullivan's list of most comparable pitches to Stroman's.  It is an impressive set of comps.

In retrospect, it's stunning to think that the Jays could have missed out on Stroman (selected #22 overall in 2012) by choosing DJ Davis at #17. Luckily Stroman fell to the Jays at 22. Imagine if the Jays had chosen Corey Seager (#18) instead of Davis - I was hoping the Jays would pick Seager - in addition to Stroman in that draft.

the drafting of Stroman reflects positively on the Jays, not negatively, as you frame it Greenfrog. 

Why is it so difficult for people to recognize that even the best management teams will make mistakes?  I'd rather a front office aim for the fences and swing and miss rather than work the count for the occasional single or walk. 

I love the Box and am frequently informed by the insightful commentary around here - but there is plenty of groupthink that leads to relentless bashing of the front office, and it's frankly unrealistic. 

Actually, I wasn't bashing the front office. I think the Jays made a great choice in selecting Stroman at #22. I was imagining an alternative scenario in which the Jays ended up with Davis but not Stroman. Lots of people were surprised that Stroman fell as far as he did. Fortunately it worked out for the Jays.

In any event, I can hardly bash the front office, as I was on the record at the time as liking the Davis pick, although I also wrote that I was hoping for Giolito or Seager (who were chosen #16 and #18). I also wrote that "Stroman is kind of a nifty extra pick that has the folks at BA going gaga."

Sometimes you look good in retrospect, sometimes…not so much.

I think Teams go into the Draft with certain mindsets. If they get who they want first pick, it will determine what happens next. If they don't get who they want, does that alter the entire draft? I think it just might. It's possible the Jays future drafts will be like last years. I don't know what it was, but last year was very different.

I thought it was fairly likely that the Jays would win arbitration. If you look at the MLBTR estimate for Donaldson's arbitration salary value (using players with his experience and previous salary) it was $4.5 million. Moreover, the Jays owned the $5M mark. So a round number assessment of Donaldson as being worth $5M would result in a Jays win. Given both those things, the Jays was predictable in advance. Say http://www.battersbox.ca/comment.php?mode=view&cid=297143 for instance.

Great to save some cash, as the team is so clearly on a tight budget, but is starting off a relationship with your new star (before he's played a single game) with an arbitration hearing really the right play? You have to think this could have been settled in advance.

The problem is that his salary will rise every year. You overpay the first year and it's very costly down the road. Don't feel bad for Donaldson, he is a supertwo and it's still  a huge raise for him as he made 500K last year.

With ST so close, I find myself unrealistically optimistic.

Yes it is crazy and will not happen but I remember EE was tossed around a few years ago Toronto to Oakland to Toronto. Since then he did a lot better. So why not Justin Smoak, Michael Saunders and Andy Dirks also improve their production. They all have something that they are strong at M Saunders has speed for example. Just hit .260.

Alison Gordon died on Thursday. She was, as the obit says, a pioneering baseball writer for the Star beginning in 1979.  I met her in the 1980s through an APBA league and found her to be as engaging and fun as her writing.  I will not forget her directness and her full-throated laugh. One of a kind.

You have to think this could have been settled in advance.

I would think that if a team that has successfully avoided every arbitration hearing since 1997 didn't resolve it, then it would be much more logical to say that "you have to think this couldn't have been settled in advance."

Donaldson is a special case.  He had a late arrival, and so he is likely to spend his best years in arbitration.  And his best years (to date) have been very, very good in reality, if not as impressive to the old-school. 

For most stars, the arbitration/free agency system works pretty well.  Not so for Donaldson.  This year is a big deal for him financially.  In Toronto, he might up the Triple Crown numbers that impress arbitrators.

It's entirely possible that the Jays brass knew that stroman would fall to their second pick but Davis wouldn't. It doesn't have to be a straight case of believing that Davis was the better talent.

The Valentine's Day birthday team is 50 shades of awful, but what exactly are the odds that a ballplayer named Candy LaChance would be born on Valentine's Day and play for a team called the Bridegrooms?

The problem is that his salary will rise every year. You overpay the first year and it's very costly down the road.

That's certainly one problem in that previous compensation is a factor that the collective agreement requires interest arbitrators to consider. A bigger problem I think, is that every 'overpay' has consequences throughout the baseball salary structure, for every team and in every year. Because the arbitration system is based upon comparability, all of the those times when a club tosses in an extra million beyond what the com parables suggest is an appropriate range, skews the comparables by a factor multiplied by each year that occurs. That's a crazy business model.

You have to think this could have been settled in advance.

Well, Donaldson changed agent over a year ago, in preparation for this arbitration hearing. And Toronto has policies to avoid arbitration and not to negotiate once final numbers are exchanged.

Agree with you, Mike, about Alison Gordon.  She (and Dave Perkins) made
The Star my go-to paper for baseball commentary back then.  She was a
pleasure to read -- witty, generous, and sound of judgement.  Sorry
she’s gone.  There are some nice obits for her online; and some warm
mentions from Lloyd Moseby and John Mayberry.  Her book, Foul Balls, is
still a good read.

Athlon Sports Baseball 2015 MLB Preview issue has the Toronto Blue Jays making the Postseason. That's with the existing Team filling it's holes in-house. Imagine what would might have been possible if A.A. could make the deals?

Joba's tendencies and record suggest that he'd be a poor choice, but Soriano could be quite useful. My interest in this team is declining sharply, however, given a consistent pattern of disinterest in actually filling major holes. The resulting depthless teams get sunk by that fact, in an entirely predictable manner.

Who the hell wants to invest energy in that?

It may be possible for a bunch of young pitchers and players at 2B/OF to come through and make this team competitive. But it doesn't make sense to bet that way

Jeepers, if you're losing interest before Spring Training starts it's going to be really long summer.

I think 2B/OF will be just fine. The real holes are 1B/closer, but that's not enough to make the team uncompetitive. That would take an injury or 2 at a key position.

A good question about first is what are the Jays thinking for backup plans.  I'm wondering if they are hoping to see both Pompey & Pillar tear the cover off in spring and then be looking at shifting Bautista to 1B with Pillar in RF and Pompey in CF, or if that might be a longer term plan even for mid-summer or next year.  Thus trying to find a way to keep 1B warm until you can put both kids in the outfield.

Now would that work?  Lets look at some projections and stretch them out to 600 PA...
WAR per 600 PA
Pillar: Steamer - 1.3, ZiPS - 0.4, average: 0.85
Pompey: Steamer - 0.4, ZiPS - 1.3, average: 0.85
Smoak: Steamer - 1.2, ZiPS - 0.2, average: 0.7

So the projection systems pretty much say it doesn't matter which mix of 2 out of 3 of those guys you use.  Still, I think most of us think Pillar/Pompey have a higher ceiling than Smoak plus moving Bautista to 1B might be better for his long term health (at least the knees on that turf).  None of the 3 though project to be stars or even 'league average' (2 WAR) thus making 1B an obvious spot for improvement as is CF potentially.

Now, what about 2B?
Travis: S - 1.8, Z - 1.1, average: 1.45
Izturis: S - 0.5, Z - 0.3, average: 0.4
Goins: S - -0.3, Z - -0.2, average: -0.25

No question here that Travis should be the opening day guy at 2B, but I suspect Izturis will get that assignment with Travis needing to play in AAA for April (thus adding a year of control for the Jays).

Closer/pen is a lot more complex though.  So many moving pieces, so many players, that I'd rather not touch it today.  Plus I think AA will get another pitcher or two before spring is over.

Some good points to remember.
A lot of really positive and almost overly positive reports and articles have been written about the Jays this offseason. Some of them by people who are not the Jay's writers or Jays fans, just good Baseball writers. That doesn't happen very often, or hardly at all, or I can't remember when.

The Jays won 83 games with a lot of guys who are not with the team any more. Part of the issue was that those people were not good enough to stay. The Jays have what I consider as upgrades, small to massive, at CF, LF, 1B, 3B, C, and possibly 2B.

Drew Hutchison has been said to have made physical changes in how he throws some pitches. He's reportedly better since those changes were made, perhaps enough to be a number 2 Starter soon. Marcus Stroman and not Dustin McGowan starts the season and thus far Marcus might be an Ace. If not now then very, very soon. Chances are good that our number 5 Starter is better than J.A. Happ, maybe only a bit better, if not more.

The Bullpen will be better, in A.A. we should trust. There are people that are Fans, no matter what. Everyone should decide what kind of fan they are. Are you a Jays fan or are you a Baseball Fan, just one or both, or neither?

For 4th Outfielder availability I'd put Andy Dirks, if healthy as top choice, With either Kevin Pillar 59 G, 218 ABs, .239 .274 .367 or Ezequiel Carrera 176 G, 435 ABs, .253 .305 .340 as alternative choices.

For Infielder availability,

"A good question about first is what are the Jays thinking for backup plans. I'm wondering if they are hoping to see both Pompey & Pillar tear the cover off in spring and then be looking at shifting Bautista to 1B with Pillar in RF and Pompey in CF, or if that might be a longer term plan even for mid-summer or next year. Thus trying to find a way to keep 1B warm until you can put both kids in the outfield."


the way I'm looking at it to start is to just ignore the rookies altogether. I assume that pompey and travis start in AAA. those two are the backup plan.

I look at it to start as having 3 platoons at the bottom of the order:

1b/dh smoak*/valencia
cf/lf dirks/pillar
2b izturis/tolleson

* - could be navarro instead of smoak.

I think we could get passable bottom order production from those platoons (and their 3yr splits support that).

if pompey or travis want to crash that party, or if pillar wants to show he can hit rhp, then great.

"With ST so close, I find myself unrealistically optimistic."

there's reason to be optimistic.

jays have 3 top-20 2014 war position players and 5 top 75. they have 3 top-50 2014 war pitchers.

the jays likely have the toughest part of building a team - elite performance at the top of the roster.

now they have to worry about patching holes at the bottom of the roster, but usually it's much easier to do that than to find the elite performance at the top of the roster.

First Las Vegas over/unders. Jays at 83.5.

How accurate has Vegas been with its MLB predictions over time?

For those who are counting on Dirks as a platoon OF to begin the season:  please keep in mind that the Jays have now announced that Dirks will report to minor-league training camp to continue rehabbing his injured back.   It sounds like he might not be physically ready to begin the season in the Jays outfield.

Maybe Vegas isn't very bullish on the Jays after the 2013 disaster, but does anyone else think the team will really have to struggle to win less than 83 games this year?

84 games, I should say.

The division isn't as strong as it once was, with Tampa not looking great, Baltimore hopefully regressing to the mean, the Yankees age, and Boston's possibly awful rotation, this could be a year where the Jays steal a few more wins from divisional opponents.

"....The resulting depthless teams get sunk by that fact, in an entirely predictable manner.  Who the hell wants to invest energy in that?....."

The notion that baseball is a "predictable" sport -- or that specific teams will "predictably" sink -- is a strange one.  Baseball, like other sports, is simply not predictable.  You always get the people who say "I told you so" when the season is over, but ultimately nobody knows.  If it was so easy to predict, the gamblers would all be wealthy people.  If you've decided not to "invest energy" in a particular team, it's not because they are predictable, it's because you don't want to take that leap of faith that fanhood involves.  Every year, fans jump on and off the bandwagons of various teams, because the teams end up doing better or worse than predicted.  Nobody knows -- and assessing the "depth" of a lineup in February is far from a foolproof way of predicting the season.

"....It may be possible for a bunch of young pitchers and players at 2B/OF to come through and make this team competitive. But it doesn't make sense to bet that way...."

But being a fan of a specific team is not the same as a wagering choice, is it?   Most of us don't set conditions on our loyalty.  We don't choose our favorite team on the basis of whether the oddsmakers decide that they are likely to win or not.

".....My interest in this team is declining sharply, however, given a consistent pattern of disinterest in actually filling major holes...."

I agree that Anthopoulos isn't doing the conventional thing: he's not looking at the weakest links on the team and spending all of his money on those holes.  He has chosen a less conventional strategy, but that doesn't mean it must be the wrong strategy.  The unconventional approach could work. There is little question that he has significantly upgraded the lineup in two key places (3B and C).   And if you factor in health and defence and platoons, the Jays are probably as good as last year (or better) in the other lineup spots too, so overall the lineup is likely to be better.  The pitching will, arguably, improve too, if we assume that the young pitchers are still improving and the reliable veterans will be reliably around the same.  So there's a pretty good chance that the Jays will do better in 2015.  Who's to say that this won't lead to a playoff position?  It seems far too early to be writing off their chances.

Of course I share the frustration of many fans that the owners didn't open up their wallets to allow Anthopoulos to acquire a couple of top-caliber relievers and a top 2B.  This doesn't necessarily prevent the Jays from having a good season in 2015.  It ain't predictable.

I don't pretend to know much about gambling, but isn't Vegas motivated to arrive at a number (83.5 in the Jays' case) that will attract an equal number of bettors choosing over as choosing under?

One assumes that 83.5 is their forecast, but could it not be a little deeper than that? The 83.5 could be their assessment of what the betting public's aggregated forecast would be. So even if Vegas somehow forecasts the Jays to win 88 games, say, that is one thing, but not the same thing as forecasting that the betting public forecasts them to win 83.5 (with, presumably, an equal number of overs and unders).

I don't know how deep the thinking goes when setting these betting lines. As an uninformed non-bettor, my guess is that Vegas knows that certain teams tend to get overrated by the public and that others tend to be underrated, and so they set their betting lines based on the widespread public beliefs rather than their true forecasts.

Or maybe the betting world is too sharp for all that and the betting lines do actually represent true forecasts.

I'd be interested in hearing insights from those that know something about this world.

Toronto has policies to avoid arbitration and not to negotiate once final numbers are exchanged.

scottt, those policies make it more likely, not less likely, that negotiations will be real and that a settlement will occur. This is not a club that lowballs in negotiations and forces players to arbitration. Prior to this year, only one player (Bill Risley, who lost at arbitration in 1997) has gone to arbitration since 1991. I'd call that an extremely successful record of negotiating with players, in that voluntary agreements have been reached in every other case.

The Blue Jays are one of the teams that employ the policy colloquially referred to as "file and trial". It means that prior to filing arbitration numbers, the team and player are required to make their very best efforts to settle the case, rather than posturing up until the point when arbitration numbers are exchanged. Both parties run a risk by not making their best efforts to settle the case before numbers are exchanged. You can't bargain superficially until then, avoid reaching a settlement, and then ask for your chips back when you see the last card in your hand (the other party's arbitration number vs. yours) and that you are likely to lose. And again, the real test of the success of the Blue Jays' bargaining approach is best seen in the absence of arbitration hearings since 1997.

Lastly, in respect of a couple of Mike Green's points, I would be hesitant to suggest that the player lost the case because either the arbitration panel used an unsophisticated methodological approach to assessing the player or else misapplied the collective bargaining "special accomplishments" criteria that in rare cases allows for comparability beyond the one service group higher. In respect of the latter criteria, I think that it is obviously one to be applied sparingly, so as to not undermine the overall comparability scheme on which salary arbitration is based. I don't think "special accomplishment" is simply another way of saying "a very good player". Otherwise, most Super Two's, who are good enough to be brought up early in the season and thus gain access to arbitration in the first place as opposed to having their salaries set by the club, might fall into that exception.

In respect of Mike's first point, that the adjudicators may have used an unsound or unsophisticated methodology in assessing "the quality of the player's contribution to his club during the past season (including but not limited to his overall performance, special qualities of leadership and public appeal)", the adjudicators are mutually agreed upon by MLB and the MLBPA based upon their acceptability for applying the criteria in the collective agreement. It seems hard for one party to say afterwards, that the mutually agreed arbitrators were incapable of applying the very criteria that they were mutually agreed upon as competent to apply. But in any event, even if the adjudicators were likely to assess the player on the basis of 'common' vs. 'sophisticated' statistics, that's something the player's agent ought to have known about in making the decision to file and in his submissions to the panel where he would have an opportunity to convince them otherwise. These aren't lay reporters, fans or bloggers, they're rather sophisticated adjudicators.

My own guess is that when the arbitration numbers were exchanged, I suspect that most clubs and agents would have predicted that Donaldson would lose. i don't know of any arbitration award for a Super Two in the neighbourhood Donaldson's agent was seeking. Even the club's number seemed high for a player with less than 3 years' service. But my major suspicion when seeing the very large spread was really nothing more that it was unlikely the Blue Jays were that wrong.

Does the Blue Jays future change if Beeston doesn't veto A.A.'s signing attempt (only Anibal Sanchez fits)? I really believe it does. A.A. was after two Starters and a Bat that offseason (and ended up getting 3 Starters and a Bat). I just don't know enough to speculate accurately.

I think that the Jays could easily win fewer than 84 games.  All that it would take would be a few more than expected injuries particularly in the pitching staff, and less than expected performance from young players.  On the other hand, if they get a few less than expected injuries and in particular if the top four starting pitchers are healthy,  they should win 95 games. That would be without any surprise Bautista/Encarnacion style breakouts, just everyone performing in accordance with career norms and normal aging patterns and the young players producing at what I consider to be at average rates.  I have them at 89 wins objectively.  They would be an easy "over" for me.

This is the first Blue Jays team since the glory years that I can see winning 100 games if everything breaks right.  The converse is that they can win 78 games or fewer (the team gets a rash of injuries and is out of it by the All-Star break and sells at the deadline) if everything breaks wrong.

http://www.baseballessential.com/news/2015/02/14/why-josh-donaldson-lost-his-arbitration-hearing/

This site explains the arbitration hearing part much better than most. A lot of teams exchange numbers with the player's agent and then try to meet in the middle.

A.A. didn't have any idea of Donaldson true first year arb value, so he wanted to go to arbitration for that. It's hard to put a fair value on a 29 year-old Super Two MVP candidate when anyone slightly comparable is 4-6 years younger. Donaldson, on the other hand, is after as much as possible now. He's not a free agent until age 33, an age where long term contract are rarely handed out.

I'm surprised how many are surprised by the arbitration result for Donaldson.  Service time is the top item in salary arbitration - you are compared to those with the same or similar lengths of time in MLB.  If the dollar amount the arbitrator determines Donaldson is worth is more or less than $5.05 mil then that decides what he gets.  Clearly he picked under.  Why?  Well, the most recent salary for someone with that experience level and near MVP performance is Mike Trout.  He signed a deal that pays him $5.25 mil this year - his super-two year (via Cot's).  Trout though has 2 2nd place MVP and an MVP season under his belt while Donaldson has a 4th and 8th place MVP season under his belt.  Clearly Donaldson is a great player but isn't as good as Trout, so should his value be just 200k less than Trouts?  The arbitrator clearly decided the answer to that is 'no' and I find it hard to argue that.

As to Donaldson's long term issue - he has 3 more years of arbitration left, his ages 30-31-32 seasons.  He hits free agency at 33, the age most players are moving into serious decline (just look at Jays history to see tons of examples of players who were great pre-33 and had no career after).  I could see the Jays trying to sign him to a 5 year deal, figuring ages 33/34 might be solid depending on his work habits (I have no idea what they are) but that'd be the limit.  The Jays have tons of leverage right now and could sign him to a team friendly contract but odds are will hesitate.

As to what an age 33 and beyond Donaldson might do lets check some of the all-time greats at 3B...
Mike Schmidt: possibly the best ever - pre-age 33 150 OPS+, post he had 3 more 150 seasons, 2 in the 140's, and ended with a 112/91 and then quit as he was embarrassed to be hitting 203.
George Brett: aka Jay killer in 85.  Pre age 33 143 OPS+, after 124, just twice over 140.
Wade Boggs: aka almost a Jay (Gillick debated taking him in Rule 5 draft, decided not to, then was going to take him the next year but Red Sox protected him). Like Donaldson a late start (age 24 reached) 147 OPS+ pre 33, never reached that level after that, just twice over 120
Eddie Mathews: first 3B to get 500 HR, 149 OPS+ pre age 33, just 4 years after that with OPS+ of 126-108-111-98

What about ex-Jays?
Kelly Gruber: did not play from age 32 beyond
Rance Mulliniks: just 718 PA post age 32 with a 96 OPS+ (Jays kept him instead of Cecil Fielder to DH in 89 and beyond...sigh)
Scott Rolen: briefly a Jay, 109 OPS+ age 33 and beyond, 126 pre, just 3 of his 5 post 32 seasons had over 100 games, none 135+
Troy Glaus: played at age 33 but not age 34 or beyond.
Tony Batista: same as Glaus, played at 33, but not 34 or beyond although he did try to (AAA for Washington at 34)
Ed Sprague: 45 games at 33 and that was it (actually hit well, but just 107 PA)
Garth Iorg: didn't play at 33 and beyond (thankfully...his age 32 was a 44 OPS+)
Roy Howell: didn't play at 31 or beyond  (77 OPS+ at 30) very odd for someone who came up at 20.

Current Jays....
Encarnacion: entering age 32 season, signed for age 33 as well - moved to DH/1B
Bautista: 159 OPS+ at 33, signed for age 34/35 seasons. - moved to RF with 1B/DH in his future

Age 33 and beyond is a tough, tough time at 3B.  It is a very safe bet ML executives understand this and that makes it very hard for Donaldson to hope for much of a deal when he hits free agency unless he is performing at a 140+ OPS+ level at that time (his 2013 level) where you can lose 20 points and still be very valuable.

This is not a club that lowballs in negotiations and forces players to arbitration.

That's right, it's not and I don't think they did. They probably offered him a bit more than the 4.5 million he was projected to make. They officially offered 4.3 because they knew he wanted more than 4.7 so they probably at least offered that much, and maybe as high as 5 million. The arbitrator took the Jays offers because it was closer to what he thought was fair value so the 4.5 million figure seems accurate. The 5.75 million figure Donaldson asked for was way up in the sky and probably even higher than what the Jays anticipated.

I don't think anyone can argue that 5.75 million is fair value for a guy with 2.15 years of service time. His age does not enter into the equation. They lowballed him because they knew his demands would be excessive and they took advantage of that. Maybe he thought the Jays would go to arbitration with the highest offer they made him but if they did that, there would be no incentive for players to ever settle, except to avoid the hearing--which seems very moot to me as the agent can handle that by himself.

I like all these posts. I really like Mike Green's 78-95 win range. The "everything breaking right and the everything breaking wrong" is how I believe it works too.

Janssen's food poisoning caused him to become in effective. That is an example to me of breaking wrong. It probably cost us 3 games I would guess.

B Lawrie playing 125, 107 & 70 games in the last 3 years is an example of expecting it to happen for many on this site.
B Morrow's 21, 10 & 6 starts is another example of a not surprising ocurrence.

".....I just don't know enough to speculate accurately...."

Wow.  I wish all of us admitted this more often.

It's not as clear as you make it that Janssen's food poisoning caused his poor second half. I don't remember reading about a loss of velocity following that. I'm sure the Jays would have retained him if they were sure it was just food poisoning.  Casey's health is always going to be a concern.

“I was there for five years, that’s a long time. Half a decade, that’s the bulk of my career,” Morrow said. “From day one the fans embraced me. I liked the people in the organization, training staff, you guys in the media were good to me. All in all it was a good experience so I wanted to say thanks.”

I'm sure those 8 million seasons will be remembered with fondness. Yep, that's 2 million per starts. In the end that 3 years, 20 million contract was another bad move.

Brandon Morrow was turning into the Starter everyone thought he could be in 2011 (age 26) with 11-11, 4.72, 179.1 IP with great supporting stats. In the first 11 weeks of 2012 (age 27), he was even better 7-4, 3.01, 77.2 IP. Then he spent the next 10 weeks on the D.L.. Returning he was still good 4-4, 2.57, 56.0 IP. The only faint warning item was a drop in SO/9 from 10.2 in 2011 to 7.8 in 2012.

From that point on Brandon Morrow as we knew him disappeared and who we actually got wasn't even a good reliever. No one could expect anything faintly like that to happen, it's just too extreme.

That's an interesting read about why Donaldson lost his arbitration case.

Just heard an interesting interview on The Fan with a guy from The Hardball Times who says that an analysis of the strike zone as called by umpires shows that the strike zone has grown substantially in the last 7 or 8 seasons. From an average of 436 square inches in 2007 to an average 475 square inches in 2015. He said that in particular, the bottom of the strike zone is now lower than it used to be, and that this growth of the strike zone accounts at least 33% of the drop in offense over that time period, and that was probably a low estimate. He noted, too, that on 0-2 counts the strike zone for the next pitch is considerably smaller, and that on 3-0 counts, the strike zone for the next pitch is considerably larger. I would presume that is at least partly because the umpire is expecting a ball on an 0-2 pitch as the pitcher tries to get the batter to chase, and expecting a strike on a 3-0 pitch as the pitcher just tries to get one over as the batter usually has the take sign.

If you don't bother to read the article, you'll find that Donaldson's comps (using OPS and service time) were apparently Kyle Seager, Freddie Freeman, Justin Upton and Anthony Rizzo.  It's awfully superficial; Donaldson has been far superior to all of them over the last 2 years (and indeed closer to Trout than they are to him).  And as for Trout's contract, it's back-end loaded.  He is scheduled to make $19.5 million next year.  Unless Donaldson puts up very impressive Triple Crown numbers, he'll probably get 1/2 that. 

It's not only a sabermetric thing.  The MVP voters over the last two years have pretty clearly expressed the opinion that the three best players in the AL were Mike Trout, Miguel Cabrera and Josh Donaldson.  And they were right. 

One assumes that 83.5 is their forecast, but could it not be a little deeper than that? The 83.5 could be their assessment of what the betting public's aggregated forecast would be.

Absolutely it's the latter. Vegas is not projecting team wins (that's up to Steamer and Davenport etc). Vegas sets their over/under in a place where they forecast they would make the most money based on how they think the public will bet.

With the later start to the Season, Grapefruit and Cactus League Spring Training starts later, and Pitchers and Catchers report later. They should be there now, only showing up one week and a bit later.

With that occurring, we have a series of question that must be answered by April 6th.
1. Who's the Jay's 5th Starter?
2. Who's the Jay's Closer?
3. Who besides Cecil, Loup and Estrada earns a Bullpen Spot?
4. Where does Dioner Navarro go, and who comes back in trade?
5. Who's the Backup Catcher?
6. Who plays Center Field?
7. Who's the 4th Outfielder?
8. Who's the Jay's starting 2B?
9. Who are the last two bench Players?

Only a fool gives a glib answer and if you're offended, too bad. Too many assumptions have been made, and way too much has happened this offseason for everything to remain unchanged. A.A. has said that a lot happens in Spring Training; teams find they have needs. A.A. has a few Assets that might have value.

1. Dioner Navarro's value will increase as Catchers get hurt all the time before Season opens. Sometimes it's The Starter that does. Dioner is a good Starting Catcher with good power, despite minor defensive lacks/issues. That still has value.
2. Besides Kevin Pillar we have Andy Dirks (when healthy), Ezequiel Carrera and Caleb Gindl as MLB-capable Outfielders. That in itself might not be significant, but it does add additional value.
3. There is also Maicer Izturis, Steve Tolleson, Ryan Goins, Munenori Kawasaki and Ramon Santiago as MLB-capable Middle Infielders. That in itself might not be significant, but it does add additional value.
4. Anything else A.A. wants to trade.

A lot could still happen, how significant I don't know, but it will sure be interesting to follow.

Vegas is not projecting team wins (that's up to Steamer and Davenport etc).

Just for fun I had a look at Clay Davenport's AL East projections for 2014. They went like this, with the actual 2014 record and placement beside:

TB 92-70 (77-85, second last)
BOS 88-74 (71-91, last)
NYY 85-77 (84-78, second)
BAL 82-80 (96-66, first)
TOR 80-82 (83-79, third)

This is not a knock on Clay, but last year's projections weren't particularly close. Speculating on a season's outcome is a very hard thing to do, and I have to question the great weight some afford to projections of this sort. Last year for example, you could likely have done as well by asking the cat.

and if you're offended too bad?  really? 

Richard, you seem to have mistaken a lack of social skills for insight and honesty.. 

you can be both honest and insightful (which you often are) and polite and respectful (concepts which I doubt you fully comprehend). 

tone it down, please.  or don't.  In all honesty, I find you wildly entertaining, but I don't think that's what you are going for. 

As to Donaldson's long term issue - he has 3 more years of arbitration left, his ages 30-31-32 seasons.  He hits free agency at 33, the age most players are moving into serious decline (just look at Jays history to see tons of examples of players who were great pre-33 and had no career after).  I could see the Jays trying to sign him to a 5 year deal, figuring ages 33/34 might be solid depending on his work habits (I have no idea what they are) but that'd be the limit.

3 years with most of the risk on the player side. It's usually a huge mistake to convert that in a contract that puts all the risk on the team side. Think Vernon wells, Ricky Romero, Alex Rios, Brandon Morrow, etc. Best case scenario is to pay him one year at a time for 4 years and get the compensation pick after that if he's worth it.

What contracts have turned in favor of the Jays besides Bautista, who was a gamble and Encarnation, who was non-tendered?

bautista and EE's contracts are huge wins for the Jays, and those contract can't be discounted because they were risky any more than Morrow's contract - which was risky - can be deemed a failure. 

Good questions for the Jays...
1. Who's the Jay's 5th Starter? - my bet is Sanchez or Estrada...I expect Norris to be in AAA but he is a dark horse here
2. Who's the Jay's Closer? - Cecil has the seniority argument but I think someone new will come in and get it
3. Who besides Cecil, Loup and Estrada earns a Bullpen Spot? - new closer gets us to 4, remaining 3?  Delabar, Drabek, Redmond...unless one has options and Jenkins doesn't
4. Where does Dioner Navarro go, and who comes back in trade? - Impossible to predict as it'll be to someone who has an injury at CA or 1B/DH
5. Who's the Backup Catcher? - Thole.  I don't see how it can be anyone else as long as Dickey is here
6. Who plays Center Field? - I think Pillar will get first crack with Pompey pushing hard
7. Who's the 4th Outfielder? - not Pillar or Pompey, it'll be a vet, probably Dirks.
8. Who's the Jay's starting 2B? - Izturis to start the season, Travis by June I expect
9. Who are the last two bench Players? - Goins I think will be one (can play SS/2B at a wonderful level for late innings), someone to be used in a platoon somewhere for the other slot

Of course, I could be waaay wrong.  Guess we'll see.

Not really, John, you are usually right. I just didn't think everything was that obvious.

Shi Davidi reports that the club is still attempting to convert Dwight Smith Jr. to second base despite the presence of Travis.  It's a bit of an odd move in light of the fact that the organization isn't exactly bursting with corner OFs.  It will push back his ETA a year or more, but if he can manage the position and hit decently, it will have been worth it. He definitely has his work cut out for him.

In answer to some of Richard's questions.

The phrase "it's his job to lose" comes to my mind.
So M Buehrle will use ST to prepare because his spot in the rotation is guaranteed. As the season progresses he will have to be very bad to lose it. So guarantee!!

Some have suggested that we should try to win this year. They feel adding more talent and filling holes is a good approach. Make trades & spend money. Sometimes that works and sometimes it does not. A 3rd option not mentioned is fielding the best team from the available players. I strongly recommend this be considered. Players with options get sent down in favor of players without options.
As worded by Richard "who will earn a job". I hope Jenkins gets a fair chance.
The 5th spot in the rotation should go to one of Estrada, Jenkins, Sanchez or Norris. The experience for Estrada probably gives him the edge. He should just have to prepare himself during ST not prove himself. As a starter it looks like he will give 6 IP per start which is good. Norris and Sanchez have a higher ceiling. They may succeed immediately or take some time. They also probably have innings limitations. So it should work itself out, injuries etc...

The pen has to be as strong as possible. Luckily we do not have someone who believes that the closers job belongs to him. Someone has to pitch the 9th inning well. Let us see who will take it. Loup, Cecil & Redmond IMO have a guaranteed job somewhere in the pen. They have earned it so they should just be allowed to use ST to prepare. Estrada, Sanchez & Jenkins did well enough last year to be highly considered for a job in the pen. I reluctantly use the 7th spot on Opening day to save an asset. That would be Delabar & Drabek and they should compete during ST.

I like our top 4 starters to go 7 & 8 innings per start if healthy. This will save the pen. I also like the 2 lefties in the pen Loup & Cecil and the long men Redmond, Estrada & Jenkins. Jenkins gave up earned runs in 4 of the 21 games he pitched in for the Jays. Does anyone think this is good? I think it is outstanding.
So I am fine with what we have now. If AA can add a good arm, that would be good. Also every year someone in AAA & AA do quite well.

For the position players ... I believe most of the decisions have already been made. 2B, CF and the bench will sort itself out, injuries etc...

bautista and EE's contracts are huge wins for the Jays, and those contract can't be discounted because they were risky any more than Morrow's contract - which was risky - can be deemed a failure.

There are 2 risks to a player's profitability, injury and poor performance. Players are willing to ensure themselves against injury but they don't recognize that they may suck in a year or two. However, that's by far the greatest risk to the team. Bats was making $2. 4 million when he signed. He was in danger of hurting himself before hitting free agency and signed for $64 million.  He was the best player on the team but he only had one outstanding season after 4 years of service time and would not have remained under team control.

The point is, if your dollars are limited you simply cannot convert players under team control into free agents. For Bautista the Jays converted 1 year under team control into 6 years under a reasonable contract. For Donaldson, you have 4 years under team control at a reasonable cost and minimum risk. Remember that when AA signed Bats and EE he basically did nothing on the free agent market the following years. Extending Donaldson would be a the cost of not upgrading somewhere else during those 5 or 6 years.

As a side note, players that are kept down to avoid super two status probably feel like they have been jerked around by the team more than players who didn't win an arbitration hearing. Those can always blame their agent.
Disclosure: my last raise was in 1999.

How well can Dwight Smith Jr play the OF? Hopefully well enough. A team needs versatility. He has hit well so far, now he has to do it in AA. Hopefully he gets 400-500 ABs in AA and learns the IF. Then he can be a Sept callup, since he has to be protected on the 40 man roster after 2015.

Sanchez needs to be stretched and should go make some starts in Buffalo if he doesn't win a starting job.
He could come back to close around mid-year without affecting his development.

Loup is a very effective lefty, but I'm afraid that he'll be used for the 8th inning regardless of who's batting.

Ideally, you have to stretch Redmond, Jenkins and Estrada. Maybe these guys can go out and throw 3 innings if there is no appointed closer?

Can't wait for spring training to start.

In David Laurila's latest piece for Fangraphs, he noted that D Smith practiced 2nd in the AFL, but Smith told him that it was for versatility and he wasn't switching positions.

my clairvoyance for the year is that hendriks will be a very effective reliever for us this year.

I'm hoping to see these guys earn the opening day bullpen spots:

cecil
loup
delabar
redmond
jenkins
hendriks
rasmussen

"cecil
loup
delabar
redmond
jenkins
hendriks
rasmussen"

No Estrada, Sanchez or Norris?

I can see Norris going to AAA, but one of Estrada/Sanchez should be in the bullpen and other likely a starter unless something really goes wrong.

One of the assumptions being made with roster construction has been that we're going with a 7 man bullpen. All this blows up if Gibbons decides he needs a 8 man pen to start the season. Don't want to see the team carry 3 catchers either, but we'll see over the next few weeks as this team takes shape.

My roster for the bench on opening day would be:
Navarro
Valencia
Goins
Dirks

Dirks is coming off an injury and it sounds like is ticketed for the minors. Pompey and Pillar will probably platoon covering CF and back up OF

I think the Jays hope that both Norris and Sanchez pitch well in spring training. The Jays will then leave Norris in the rotation and put Sanchez in the pen. Normally Norris would be sent down for a month or so to get an extra year of control but AA is not worried about six years from now, he is only thinking about 2015.

The pen would be Cecil, Sanchez, Loup, Estrada, Redmond and two of the rest, whoever looks the best.

I think the Jays hope that both Norris and Sanchez pitch well in spring training. The Jays will then leave Norris in the rotation and put Sanchez in the pen. Normally Norris would be sent down for a month or so to get an extra year of control but AA is not worried about six years from now, he is only thinking about 2015.

The pen would be Cecil, Sanchez, Loup, Estrada, Redmond and two of the rest, whoever looks the best.

That is probably what they will do.  It isn't what I would do.  I think Norris has a decent chance to be a very good starting pitcher, but that he needs a little time in Buffalo and a little time in the bullpen in Toronto.  It would help him keep his seasonal innings down anyways. If he's ready for the rotation by July 15, that would be great.  He had lost velocity by the end of last year (after 124 innings); you need to go slow with him. 

Not too worried about innings for Norris this year.  130 between the minors and majors last year puts him in line  for 160 or so this year and 190 next.  Keeping him to 160 shouldn't be hard, and if it is hard then odds are he is pitching extremely well.  Sanchez is at the same point, 133 innings last year so 160 this and 190 next using the old 30 inning increase per year rule.

For comparison, the Jays kid ace, Stroman, had 123 innings in 2013 and 165 last year thus has an eye on 190 this year.  Both Norris & Sanchez are a year younger than Stroman was last year which might be a factor.  Still, 160 each is a reasonable goal.  Doing a tandem start for the two of them would probably be smart - alternate who starts and who relieves and give the starter up to 5 innings, reliever gets the last 4.  Over 33 starts that would work out to roughly 150 innings each.  If one of the other starters goes down and both kids are doing well you could shift him easily into the open slot and give both a few 6-7 inning starts.  I know it isn't going to happen, but it could work really well with the LH/RH mix.  Ah well.

Of note: fun articles at FanGraphs about Stroman.  Marcus Stroman: Your AL East Jordan Zimmermann and Marcus Stroman’s Absurd Set of Pitch Comps.  Both have to make all Jays fans very, very excited about the next 6 years (Jays have 6 more years of control for Stroman).

It will be interesting to see what happens if they stretch Sanchez out in Spring Training and he ends up doing exceedingly well as a starter against typical ST lineups. Would they put him in the pen in that scenario?

I think ultimately the Jays are set on Sanchez in the pen, and it's Estrada vs. Norris for the #5 spot, but a best case scenario would be Sanchez forcing his way into the big league rotation. The more starting options, the better.

My fear with Sanchez in the pen is that there is no guarantee that he'll be an effective late-inning reliever with his poor swing/miss rate and minor league history of control problems. It's possible the bullpen might tighten his control issues, but if he fails in the pen, then stretching him back to a starter will be tough, and he would have lost a decent chunk of development time which he could have used to improve a 3rd pitch.

My guess is Cecil closes, Sanchez/Loup in the 8th, and then they go with the best of the rest in the other spots (with Hendriks, Redmond, and Drabek having the edge due to options). Obviously, Spring Training will determine a lot of things.

My assessment of the team is that I think this Blue Jay team looks good to great on offense, and much better on defense.  And with the likely steps forward of Stroman and Hutchison, likely better starting pitching too.  And as for relief pitching -- odds are good we're better there too just because we were so awful last year and it's kind of crap shoot anyway.  Where we are weak in my mind is starting depth.  I think we need a Justin Masterson type pitcher or two in the mix. A vet with a record of getting outs as a starter in MLB and who is likely to give you an ERA under 5 for 20-30 starts if you need them to. Right now we look thin in the rotation and we seem to be putting a lot of faith in one of two unproven rookies to take over. How often does that work out? Also, I think we've actually been pretty lucky with injuries this last year or two -- particularly last year with starting pitchers and the last two with Edwin and Bautista.

Overall, I like this team better than last years teams but I wish we would take one or two more flyers on established starters and be ready to spend or trade when/if the injuries happen.

"No Estrada, Sanchez or Norris?

I can see Norris going to AAA, but one of Estrada/Sanchez should be in the bullpen and other likely a starter unless something really goes wrong. "

imo sanchez and norris have to blow the doors off in ST to make the team. they need innings to build on their improvement last year.

I really don't want them in the pen to start the year, that's for sure. if they pitch well in AAA for a month or two then at that point if there's no room in the rotation then I'd consider them for the pen (would also let us save their arms).

I'd go with estrada as the #5 to start unless the kids are legit dominant in spring (not just a pretty ERA but more importantly showing dialled-in command).

"For comparison, the Jays kid ace, Stroman, had 123 innings in 2013 and 165 last year thus has an eye on 190 this year. "

probably not exactly true - I wouldn't bet that stroman did nothing during his 50gm suspension. he likely threw a good 30-50 unofficial innings at extended ST.

Generally spring and extended aren't factored into season inning estimates by fans as the data is extremely limited.

Checking the Baseball Cube, I see Stroman did have nearly 120 innings in 2012 between college and the minors.  What is interesting is Sanchez has yet to reach 100 innings at any level.  90 in A ball is the most.  Norris also has yet to reach 100 innings at any one level.

"Generally spring and extended aren't factored into season inning estimates by fans as the data is extremely limited."

IMO a 50gm suspension is an exception in this case. its not the same as normal spring training which all players share on an equal basis, or the same as missing time to injury. we know he was pitching during that time, and most likely pitching as close a simulation of normal season workload as possible. would seem wrong to ignore those innings when estimating workload.

I guess my main issue with counting those innings is we have no idea A) how many he threw and B) how many anyone else threw thus making it impossible to truly factor those in.

But if you're trying to throw out an estimate on Stroman's inning limit, then it is absolutely a factor. I do not disagree that we don't know what he did during his suspension, but what is the relevance of what anyone else threw?

What others threw gives you an idea of what is common. IE: we ignore spring stats as we figure everyone throws a similar amount.  Is rehab any different?  Also, did Norris or Sanchez do any extended spring/fall leagues?  What about winter leagues?  There are tons of extra innings out there at various levels of effort/strain on the arm. 

There is a lot of talk about Yoan Moncada from Cuba. There are about 20 of these Cuban players. Various ages and level of talent.
It is said that some will sign for large amounts which will cause them to be penalized $ and draft rights for the next 2 years.

I assume that any team not wanting to lose their draft privileges will not sign anyone.

How accurate is this?

Prior to the 2014 season, I recall AA saying that Stroman was not on any innings limit in 2014, while he clearly had innings limits for Sanchez and Norris. I'm assuming whatever Stroman did during his suspension was enough for AA to assume that he wouldn't need any innings restrictions. Then again, AA felt that letting a Tommy John recovering starter (Hutch) throw 185 innings in his first full season back was justifiable, so maybe he is just going on his gut rather than any conventional methods.

I'm pretty sure the punsihment is related to international signings budget, and nothing to do with the MLB draft (rule IV draft).

"What others threw gives you an idea of what is common. IE: we ignore spring stats as we figure everyone throws a similar amount. Is rehab any different? Also, did Norris or Sanchez do any extended spring/fall leagues? What about winter leagues? There are tons of extra innings out there at various levels of effort/strain on the arm. "

I just think a suspension is an exception.

extended ST is filled with guys rerehabbing, guys doing serious mechanical overhsuls, and short season guys for whom the whole IP per year thing isn't really used to project injuries anyways.

stroman was suspended, and a regular throwing schedule would have let him throw 10 starts in that timefrsme.

Basically once you spend over a few million on international free agents you pass the limit and lose the right to sign guys for over $300k for 2 years.  The Yankees have passed that limit this year already thus will probably go hard on Moncada and any other free agents.  The exception is guys who are of a certain age and played a few years as a pro (sorta) in Cuba already.  So teenagers are subject to the limit but guys like Yoenis Cespedes weren't.  June 15th is the magic line in the sand - after that date the Yankees are very limited until July 1st 2017.  The Jays plan on shooting over the limit this year with the son of Vlad and hopefully a lot of others.  Also over are the Angels and Red Sox and Rays this year so all 3 are limited after June 15th. 

Over at fangraphs, McDaniel posts his top 200 with 8 Jays and 2 ex-Jays of note that people like to keep tabs on. Seems pretty reasonable overall though I'm biased and would be tempted to put Sanchez right there with Norris and Syndergaard for a FV60.

Norris: 17, FV60
Hoffman: 67, FV55
Sanchez: 70, FV55
Pompey: 80, FV50
Pentacost: 93, FV50
Osuna: 119, FV50
Travis: FV45
Reid-Foley: FV45


Ex-Jays
Syndergaard: 19, FV60
Barreto: 79, FV55

the only one that looks off to me is pompey. his performance and tools match up with guys in the 60fv range imo.

The pitchers are overweighted on the list vis a vis position players.  The difficulty is that the "future value" is supposed to take into account "likelihood of achieving peak".  McDaniel has, in common with many in the scouting community, failed to adequately account for the highly variable result for pitching prospects.

Blake Swihart a better prospect than Dalton Pompey?  It is to laugh. 

You do realize Swihart's a catcher, right? A catcher at no real risk to move off the position and in fact projects to at least average defensively (on top of great pop times). Oh, and projects to an above average bat, and has a longer track record of success. For Pompey, he mentions some things that limit the projection on the bat. So, if you see a better bat at an even more valuable position than CF, why wouldn't you rank it higher?

Thanks John N for the explanation about the intl FAs.

I am still unclear about the "complete" picture. For example the D-Backs just signed about 6 young Latin players born in 1996, 97 and 98. None from Cuba. The youngest was born Jan 8, 1998 so he was 16 in July 1994. These are late signings because they were not considered the cream of the crop. Their signing bonus would also be small, I guess.

The Jays, if I recall correctly gave Barreto & Osuna Million $ bonuses. I am sure Labourt signed in Feb and so got a small bonus. I believe someone got about $ 160,000, maybe M Castro but I am not sure. H Alvarez I read got $40,000.
These Cubans are reportedly getting $60 mil. They are also older and so more developed. The signing bonus counts for players between the ages of 16 to 23.

I used the word Draft picks earlier. That was wrong. There is no draft.

I often wondered if small bonuses were not counted against the budget. For example $5000 is small, but it could put you over the budget if you only had $2000 left in your budget. That is if it was counted.

Misc Queries:
1) The Jays traded a Rule 5 pick for Intl Bonus money. How much money? In December who (1 player) would be left over that would be any good. So just probably decent. But if every $ was counted against the Cap, then you would be penalized for signing leftovers. Sorry to use that word.
2) The Yanks scored big by going over budget this year. They get the usual Latin market, plus the Cuban influx of 16-23 year olds.
3) The Jays will only get to sign from the Cream of the youngest eligible players in July 2015. The 16 year olds. Anyone older is on a list of late developers or somehow over looked players. Advantage NYY.

maybe don't give up on Jimenez quite yet.

http://www.baseballamerica.com/minors/baseballist-dozen-players-monitor-big-winter-ball-performances/#.VOCnv08SFcc.twitter

8. A.J. Jimenez, c, Santurce (Puerto Rico)

The 2008 ninth-rounder has yet to reach the majors but remains on the Blue Jays’ depth chart, albeit behind veterans Russell Martin, Dioner Navarro and Josh Thole. Jimenez combines a contact-oriented hitting approach (he finished fifth in the PRL batting race), a strong arm and quality receiving skills.

AVG G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB OBP SLG
.311 32 103 13 32 8 1 1 14 9 9 9 .372 .437


I went back and reviewed his milb track record and was reminded that it was pretty good. last year was really the only truly bad year performance wise, taking age and injury into account.

"You do realize Swihart's a catcher, right? A catcher at no real risk to move off the position and in fact projects to at least average defensively (on top of great pop times). Oh, and projects to an above average bat, and has a longer track record of success. For Pompey, he mentions some things that limit the projection on the bat. So, if you see a better bat at an even more valuable position than CF, why wouldn't you rank it higher?"

pompey has actually outhit him at every level, by a good margin, even being younger at every level with less baseball experience.

the two have shown similar hit (~.280) and power (~.145iso) overall in milb, even though pompey is younger, while pompey has shown far better plate discipline with a much much better walk rate (~12% compared to 8%), and adds in plus speed as well. defensively swihart projects as above average at c while pompey projects as very good in CF. depending on the defensive adjustments that still might give swihart an edge defensively but it can't be that much.

myself I'd put them in the same level of prospect, not two levels apart like Kiley listed them.

I think a shortcoming of Kiley's approach is that BB% is not a significant consideration for him (i.e. not its own tool), when i think its been shown to be key.

I see why you're putting them in the same group, but I'd have Swihart in the group above.

I do think you're overstating the age difference (it's 8 months). Given when the various levels have been done (for example, Swihart played 2013 at A+, all younger than Pompey's first A+ game), I'd call it a wash.

When I picture a very good defensive CF, I picture someone who's going to consistently save 10 runs above an average CF. I like Pompey's defense, but I don't know if I see that. I don't know Swihart's defense at all, so I can only go off the report.

On top of that, the average C had a 93 wRC+ last year, vs 103 for a CF, and the positional adjustment for a catcher is 12.5 vs 2.5... Catching is hard, and good catchers are scarce.

I do agree about the importance of patience, but Swihart does have plate discipline. As a scout, though, Kiley's looking at more than just what their performance shows, and he does see things in Pompey (ordinary bat speed and bat control) that will limit the upside of his bat vs Swihart.

Swihart has posted decent batting lines for his age at A+ and AA courtesy of a high BABIP without either excellent power or speed or a high line-drive rate. He's got a ways to go.

The fact that he is a catcher cuts both ways.  If he can improve further with both bat and glove, he will have quite a bit of value.  On the other hand, catchers disproportionately are sidetracked in their development by injuries.  I learned that the hard way in my bet with Aaron Gleeman so many years ago.  You'll recall he had Mauer and Mathis; I had Navarro and Quiroz.  All had done better than Swihart for their age (and Mauer was, of course, a #1 overall pick with a huge amount of batting talent).  Only Mauer really developed into anything. 

For me, it's no contest.  Pompey is a much better prospect than Swihart.  For what it's worth, KATOH sees it the same way- with Swihart at an average of 4.3 WAR through age 28 and Pompey with an average of 7.1 WAR through age 28.  I think that it is probably an underestimate- KATOH can adjust for position, but adjusting for defensive ability within the position is much more difficult. 

No one sees ordinary bat-speed from Pompey from the left side, and we've seen enough for ourselves to know that simply isn't the case. He's got a nice quick stroke from the left side and generates quite a bit of pop with it.  Phooey.

I'll agree about the added risk of catchers. I actually wanted to point out the low risk assessment McDaniel gave him on his ranking to disagree with it on that basis, but got pressed for time.

As for bat speed, I certainly don't feel in a position to argue his assessment, and I'm sceptical you are, either. We just don't have the scouting library built up to be able to judge that sort of thing. It's too easy for us to get fooled by things like bat path, as well as false points of reference that years of scouting helps with.

Can he (or his sources) be wrong? Yup. Can we be right? Yup. Experience is valuable for a reason, though, and dismissing its assessments as phooey and laughable seems a bit presumptuous.

I'm not sure I would call age a wash. 8 months is 8 months, and given pompey's relative inexperience in the game when drafted, a 1yr age gap might even underestimate the relevant difference when it comes to development curves.

and I'm not sure I agree about swihart's patience. he has a good hit tool, so his strikeouts are mostly under control, but a milb bb% under 8 is pretty poor I think. snd even his Ks have started to spike a bit at the higher levels.

its interesting looking at kiley's tool grades for the two:

Current

Pompey: 40ht, 45rp, 35gp, 60rn, 50fld, 45arm
Swihart: 30ht, 50rp, 30gp, 45rn, 45fld, 60arm

so right now pompey grades out considerably better, even if you bump swihart's fielding grade up a notch or 2 for a positional adjustment.

what's a bit strange to me is that even though pompey is younger, less experienced, has missed more time to injury, and has imo a more athletic and projectable build, kiley sees much more potential improvement in swihart. I'm not sure that's justified. even then, though, kiley's upside grades for the two are fairly similar.

here's their milb track records at the levels they have both played:

AAA

Pompey (21): 56pa, 6/6sb, 5.4bb%, 17.9k%, .442babip, .358avg, .094iso, 137wrc+
Swihart (22): 71pa, 1/1sb, 2.8bb%, 21.1k%, .321babip, .261avg, .116iso, 77wrc+

AA

Pompey (21): 127pa, 8/13sb, 11.0bb%, 14.2k%, .330babip, .295avg, .179iso, 138wrc+
Swihart (22): 380pa, 7/8sb, 7.6bb%, 17.1k%, .337babip, .300avg, .187iso, 131wrc+

A+

Pompey (21): 317pa, 29/31, 11.0bb%, 17.7k%, .380babip, .319avg, .152iso, 150wrc+
Swihart (21): 422pa, 7/15sb, 9.7bb%, 14.9k%, .350babip, .298avg, .130iso, 121wrc+

A

Pompey (20): 511pa, 38/48sb, 12.3bb%, 20.7k%, .329babip, .261avg, .133iso, 115wrc+
Swihart (20): 378pa, 6/8sb, 6.9bb%, 18.0k%, .300babip, .262avg, .134iso, 91wrc+


Combined stats in these years:

Pompey (20-21): 1011pa, 81/98sb, 11.4bb%, 18.8k%, .350babip, .289avg, .143iso, 130wrc+
Swihart (20-22): 1251pa, 22/32sb, 7.8bb%, 16.9k%, .330babip, .285avg, .148iso, 113wrc+

so far they've shown similar hit and power tools, but pompey's significant superiority in patience and baserunning has made him a much better offensive player to this point. kiley seesca plus defensive CF in pompey, and an above average defensive C in swihart. even if we give swihart the edge there I'm not sure the defensive difference is bigger or even as big as the offensive difference.

so this comes down to projecting more offensive improvement from swihart than pompey, even though as mentioned pompey is younger, rawer, more athletic, and already seems to have a better instinct for the strike zone.

now I have yet to read anything from kiley specifically critizing pompey's swing, and absent that I'm not sure why he limits pompey's upside in comparison to swihart.

what's even more interesting is that those stats may underestimate pompey's performance thanks to quick promotions. he started off very slow at every level before turning it up to a dominant level each time. if they had kept him longer at each level, there's a good chance his numbers would look significantly better.

for example in his first 2mos in Lansing he had around a .600ops with a 26k%, while his last 3 months he was around .850 and 18%. on AA he had an .372ops in his first 11gms and then got so hot he was over .850 just 20gms later. in mlb he had a .205ops in his first 6gms, and then a 1.033ops in his last 7.

unless there's some serious flaw in his mechanics that we haven't heard of yet, I'm thinking kiley is pegging him low.

There has apparently been only one qualifying centerfielder who has averaged 10 runs saved per season (according to either DRS or UZR) over the last 3 years.  That would be Carlos Gomez.   The next set (Span, Bourn, Ellsbury) would be at 5-7 runs saved per season.  I really don't know where Pompey fits on that spectrum, and the best thing to do is to wait for the numbers to come in.

I liked Swihart (very much actually) when he was drafted.  His progress since has been slow, and for a catcher that is not a great thing.  The ranking of him as the 9th best prospect in baseball to me smells of someone falling in love with a prospect.  Many of us have done it at one time or another (and I will happily plead guilty to the charge). 

You're right, Ugly, I was thinking of Swihart's patience more as a lack of a negative (as in he's not hacktastic, which would get in the way of the growth of his bat or power), whereas it is a distinct advantage for Pompey in that his approach should hold value on its own.

As for the flaws, he mentions ordinary bat speed and bat control in his full report in September, as well as a wide base and a dead hand load that could give him some timing issues against advanced pitching. Nothing major, and some of it fixable, but it could explain the limits on the enthusiasm, and the disconnect between the minor league numbers and the projections. The Swihart report doesn't really mention any issues that way.

Pompey could be getting pegged low, either due to an underestimation of his skills, or due to a desire to want to see more of how his skills work against higher competition. The latter could be from what the scouts have seen or simply because he moved across 4 levels in one year.

It just always seems weird to go at a scouting based prospect list with numbers as the source of our discontent. In the minors, the "Why" is more important than the "What"... as long as there's some "What" there. To me, the numbers available to us often only seem to tell us if there are any gotchas.

Electric carrot, I agree with your assessment of the depth of the starting staff and that it's the primary hole on this team, but I'm confused with how you reconcile that with "the likely steps forward of Stroman and Hutchison, likely better starting pitching too". Personally I was thrilled with the 52 starts we got out of Hutchison & Stroman last year, and I think it would be foolish for anybody to expect better results than 2014 - if anything, I'm expecting less, and that's where my concerns for the rotation come from. Beyond the reliability of Dickey & Buehrle you have 2 kids who really haven't made it full a through season as an MLB SP - if I thought they were locks to improve on last year, I wouldn't have concerns about the team's starting depth. I've mentioned before that I was no great fan of JA Happ, but he represented the type of insurance that would've helped the team break Sanchez & Norris into MLB roles at their own pace, instead of to fill the team's needs. Alas, that's what a GM with no $ to spend has to do - rob the rotation to pay the outfield.

but I'm confused with how you reconcile that with "the likely steps forward of Stroman and Hutchison, likely better starting pitching too".

I think we agree basically 92-93. I just meant that I think Stroman and Hutch are likely to progress as pitchers -- and that they will give more value if they are able to pitch as much as they did last year.  But as we both know that's a big IF.  I wish we had more MLB proven talent as a potential backup for them, the 5th spot and even backup for Buerhle and Dickey.  I mean these guys are reliable inning eaters but no spring chickens.

Another sign of a GM with a shortage of cash: indecision about whether to use a pitcher as a reliever or stretch him out as a starter. We saw this last spring with McGowan. This year the team is similarly hemming and hawing over Sanchez's role on the team. When you have extra cash to burn, you can sign a McCarthy or a Shields and the problem takes care of itself.

I agree that depth in the rotation is a hole, likely far greater than the bullpen. If the Jays get healthy seasons out of all four of their top starters (Dickey, Stroman, Hutchison, Buehrle), then they should be alright, but you can't bank on that, specifically with the young guys. If Sanchez or Norris make the rotation, then that compounds the issue. That's why I think Estrada should be the fifth starter and Norris/Sanchez should both be in AAA. At least in that scenario you have seven stretched out starters, and then after that you have to count on Hendriks, Francis, etc. However, if Sanchez is in the pen, then you have six starters, and Hendriks jumps to 7th (and he's out of options so if he doesn't make the team you possibly lose him). If Norris makes the rotation and both Sanchez and Estrada are in the pen, then forget it. One injury and the rotation is sunk.

AA needs to be very careful in how he constructs the pitching staff. He can't assume everyone will stay healthy. If Sanchez is going to make the team in some capacity, then my hope is he wins a rotation spot, because that might be the only way to maintain some level of depth. If he's a short reliever in the pen, then Alex is playing with fire as far as depth is concerned.

IN the 80's it was John Cerutti who kept alternating pen and rotation pre-playoff days it was Jim Gott.  Back in the WS years we saw this too with David Wells.  Later with Kevlm Escobar.  Both ended up disasters for the Jays - releasing Wells and wasting the cheap years of Escobar with him alternating between closer and starter with periods of ineffectiveness then switching from one role to the other.  That is often what happens to a 5th starter.  The club keeps alternating roles until he locks in at one of them.  Extra money to burn often results in sub-optimal results like Ash having Mondesi and the like in the late 90's and the Frank Thomas signing for JPR.  You end up with vets you feel you must play regardless of if they are the best option.  It also prevents you from upgrading later on.

Last year probably would have worked out a lot better had the Jays signed Santana and used McGowan exclusively out of the 'pen. They would have had a deeper rotation, a more productive McGowan (most likely), and an additional pick in this year's draft, with no financial obligations beyond 2014. Having resources is a good thing, in my view. If the GM squanders them, that's a reflection of the GM's abilities, not a problem inherent in having abundant resources (although perhaps necessity is the mother of invention, to some extent).

"
It just always seems weird to go at a scouting based prospect list with numbers as the source of our discontent. In the minors, the "Why" is more important than the "What"... as long as there's some "What" there. To me, the numbers available to us often only seem to tell us if there are any gotchas."


see I have to disagree here. I follow prospects as close as I can and over and over again I see the stats beating the internet prospectors.

they told me drabek was great, the stats told me he was not.

they told me sanchez was better than syndergaard, the stats told me he was not.

they told me that stroman and hutch weren't great prospects, the stats told me they were.

they told me that the myers and gausmans were elite, the stats told me they were not.

I bring stats to the argument because they've been good to me, and better than the internet prospectors. I've also found the internet guys very susceptible to groupthink when it comes tk certain prospects and certain organizations. Its hard to go against the grain too much. the internet guys have broken my heart too many times, while the stats never chose to say I told you so even though they should have.


and I try my best to learn from them and figure out which stats matter. nothing better than seeing the likes of snider and phelps bust after mashing in the minors to teach lessons about what stats to watch out for. in those cases i learned never to ignore high k rates no matter how good the other numbers. phelps also taught me the importance of adjusting for age at each level, while snider also taught me never to ignore small samples just because they looked bad.

not to say stats stand on their own - looking at tools is obviously crucial too. guys like chacin and litsch were great examples of a lack of tools compromising great stats. you always need to see the tools there, too.

but in this case, pompey has all sorts of tools, so the great numbers don't really have any caveats to them. I love these kinds of prospect lists and eat them up with gusto, but I'll always put them through the stats filter, and the stats will definitely sway me in comps where tools are comparable. and imo, guys comparable to pompey's tools, stats, and readiness are much further up this list than he is.

"Personally I was thrilled with the 52 starts we got out of Hutchison & Stroman last year, and I think it would be foolish for anybody to expect better results than 2014 -"

ah, toronto, the city where its foolish to think young kids generally improve.

most indications would lead to assuming improvement from those two, looks like.

Stroman

1. Should pitch more than 120 innings this year
2. Fip, xfip, siera as SP were all better than his era, meaning no overachievment there.
3. developmeng of his sinker led to an utterly dominating second half last year.
4. he's not a rookie anymore


Hutch

1. is not coming off of TJ this year
2. his ERA lagged massively behind his fip, xfip, and siera last year and should regresregress signifantly down toward them this year.
3. made huge improvements to his slider during the season making it a true ace pitch
4. is not a sophomore anymore.

and for both:

5. Russell Martin



not only is improvement a good bet, but there's a real chance for both to break out in big ways.

Yah, I have Hutchison as one of the guys who has a reasonable chance to be a good sleeper in roto pools. Second year after TJ surgery often sees the pitcher take a big step forward. He's still very young, and should be on the upswing in his career. Much better defensive catcher, and better overall team defense. Outstanding numbers though his minor league career, including great K/BB ratios. I think he's going to have a very good year.

I can understand the disagreement in focus. I'm just looking at lists like this from the perspective they're written from, and trying to understand them for what they are. They're written with a scouting slant, and the numbers are more to look at how things are progressing, or if there are any apparent weaknesses in how the tools are translating.

I see what you're saying about guys the scouting reports are going to get excessively high on (though I disagree on Stroman - who was praised quite often, with the only drawback being his height - and Hutchison, who was a projectable arm with command that looks well on his way to fulfilling his mid-rotation ceiling). But during the stat-heavy slants of those lists during the aughts, there were other types of misses and disappointments that occurred often. The walk-heavy guys like Decker, Hermida, Cunningham and Weglarz, or light on stuff control guys like Bowden, Hirsch, Hurley, etc. Each emphasis is going to miss guys, and there are usually systemic issues that are going to cause their misses.

In the end, I think we're in similar territory on opposite sides of the fence... You're looking at tools to flesh out how you're doing the mental math to convert their minor league stats into a representation of the player. I'm looking at the stats to give shape to what kind of a player I think their reported tools will turn them into. Really, it's just where we're looking for the outliers, or at least that's how I'm seeing it at 3am... Also, I'm a notorious skimmer with a horrible memory, so there's always a chance I missed something.

I remember one scout at the time of the Doc trade suggesting that Carrasco might be a better prospect than Drabek. Too bad the Jays couldn't snag Carrasco in the trade as well. It wouldn't have been an outrageous demand.

" (though I disagree on Stroman - who was praised quite often, with the only drawback being his height - and Hutchison, who was a projectable arm with command that looks well on his way to fulfilling his mid-rotation ceiling)."


see, that stroman criticism is a great example of bad scouting, imo. "short" is not a weakness. "lack of downward plane" is a weakness, but a scout has to be able to see that to criticize it, imo, and not just infer it based on non-pitching factors. if scouting isn't able to judge pitch quality independant of inferring it from body type, then I question its usefulness.

as for hutch, well, the numbers suggest that his ceiling is higher than just mid rotation, so this should be another good test of this debate going forward. did you know, for example, that in his first full season, coming off TJ no less, that hutch finished top 50 in pitcher fwar? and that based on his batted ball data, even that might be underrating what he did?

Just in case we get lucky and a lot of our young pitchers actually become good.

I would like to know what is good based on results. I assume mid rotation is good. But these are words. I would prefer numbers.

I evaluate something like this.
Number of starts.
ERA
Consistency
Total innings pitched and relate it somehow to number of 7 or more inning games.

So M Buehrle for the year of 2014 was good but not in July and August. I have to say he was bad in those 2 months. 10 starts in total, which was good but only 1 start where he pitched 6.2 innings. The rest of the months, 22 starts he was very good. I would not argue with anyone saying that he was Ace quality or close to it for those 22 starts. Of those 22 starts, 11 were 7+ innings.

RA Dickey : 34 starts, 215.2 IP. I think that is good. Not Ace. Better than mid rotation IMO, except I do not know what mid rotation is. So a #2. Is that fairly accurate?

M Stroman : He had many good games, IMO. After another 20-30 starts, if he does the same then he would have 200+ IP and a nice ERA , maybe 3.5. So #2?

D Hutchison: Too inconsistent. 6 games where he gave up 0 earned runs. 32 starts, 184.2 IP, ERA 4.48. Maybe this is mid rotation? A #3.

JA Happ: Some positives. 4 games where he did not give up any earned runs. 26 games started, 153 IP as a starter and ERA for the year 4.22 which includes 5 IP in relief. This is definitely a lot better than a #5. Maybe a Good #4 due to the decent ERA but only 153 IP.

I gave Hutchison a #3 because of the 184.2 IP.

In all cases I ignore the number of wins. And I did not know the inherited runs allowed or stranded.

Well, for Stroman, it (height) had two pieces - first, some doubt about lack of plane (which he's corrected), and some doubt about durability, which was hedged in the reports, saying he had a solid frame and smooth and efficient mechanics and held his velocity deep into games. Everyone figured that if he could start, he was probably going to be a #2 guy, with the 'downside' being that he can't, and becomes a front-line closer.

As for Hutchison, yeah, I knew he had a good year (especially for a TJS return), spoiled a bit by defence, sequencing and platoon splits. I'll be eager to watch how the slider holds up, and if he can come up with something to tame lefties a bit. Oh, and for fun, to see if he starts throwing lower in the zone with the arrival of Martin.

"I'll be eager to watch how the slider holds up, and if he can come up with something to tame lefties a bit."

that's probably one and the same thing, really.

"see, that stroman criticism is a great example of bad scouting, imo. "short" is not a weakness. "lack of downward plane" is a weakness"

Pedro Martinez did a podcast last year for ESPN and I walked away with the impression that being short absolutely is a weakness, and this ties back in with the assumption Stroman is just going to continue a linear progression in 2015, adding innings while getting better. Stroman's arsenal has never really been in question, but his durability is a concern, and that's directed related to his height. Pedro made it very clear that he thought his body failed him and that he didn't really have the proper prototype to be a major league pitcher, and he even went as far as to advise athletes that are his size to NOT pitch to avoid all the future complications he lives with now on a daily basis. Marcus can market #HDMH all he wants, but the baseball community definitely believes that height is a predictive factor in a pitcher's ability to withstand the rigors of a full season. Perhaps the best thing that could've happened to Stroman was the 50 game suspension, because it didn't allow the team to expose him to 32 stressful starts in 2014 too soon in his MLB career.

If I had to bet the over/under on Stroman/Hutchison starts in 2015 I'd take under 52. I really hope I'm wrong, and by a considerable margin.

I tend to think of it as...
Ace: Halladay, Stieb, Jimmy Key level - regular all-star Cy candidate often - 120+ ERA+ 200+ Innings most years.
mid-rotation: JIm Clancy, Mark Buehrle, RA Dickey level - might make an ASG or two, or even sneak into a Cy race in a peak season.  Ideal rotation has a few of these, around a 100 ERA+ gets 170-200 innings
Back end roation: John Cerutti, JA Happ - guys who might have an ERA+ in the 90's not likely to be left in the rotation long, shuffled AAA/majors often until options used up then hang on in long relief/spot starts/fill in.  might average 5  or 6 innings when starting.
I grew up in the 80's as you might guess from some of the guys I used as examples.

well, pedro had the physique of a malnourished teenager, which is probabky more relevant. and I'm sure most tall pitchers are equally sore and beat up in retirement. stroman looks twice as thick as pedro didm

but regardless, saying "he's short" is lazy, useless scouting.

here's what actual useful scouting sounds like, that actually has the confidence to analyze how his mechanics work for him and his pitches, and assess how he gets his power and stamina and whether it is sustainable, from 2012:

"Stroman has great rhythm and an aggressive lower body; there’s a lot to love here. He gets the most out of his “undersized” body while other bigger/taller pitchers get away with being less efficient. Stroman’s fastball has great life in the zone and hard arm-side run and flashes decent sink at times. He has a wipe-out slider but knows how to get lefties out as well.

Stroman has one of the best strikeout rates among draft-eligible college starters, so why are people talking about moving him to relief as a closer? Stroman worked out of the rotation throughout his junior year at Duke and maintained his fastball velocity deep into games, sitting 93-94 and touching 96 at times. It’s a size issue again, as people think Stroman’s height will stop him from being a prototypical starter. This advice makes no sense, and I hope he gets his shot to stay in the rotation as a professional pitcher.

Conclusion: Great value here, as I really like Stroman above [Andrew] Heaney, [Chris] Stratton, and a few of the high school pitchers. Size issues aside (they mean nothing), he should slot well into a pro rotation if he’s given the chance."

http://www.hardballtimes.com/marcus-stroman-the-mythbusting-machine/

p.s. I highly recommend clicking that link and reading that whole article. his frustration with scouts he talked to at that time is exactly how I felt when looking at stromsn's prospect rankings.

Size often indicates limits to how far someone can go physically thus why scouts harp on it - not something that anyone can change thus relevent.  Stroman isn't getting any taller, guys who are 6'6" can add more muscle than a guy sub 6' can.  Just like you can put more into a bigger box.  So noting his size makes sense for scouts and prospect ratings.  but they should always remember that many HOF'ers are shorter than 6' and it doesn't make it impossible for a short guy to be a starter, it just limits how much you can add to his projection going forward.  ie: if a guy is taller and hasn't built up all the way he has more growth room than Stroman has. 

but stroman was hitting 97 on the gun already, with plus breaking pitches. he didn't need a projectible frame to grow into. the stuff was already there.

Pitchers do break down from time to time.  Do short solidly built pitchers break down more often than any other pitcher?  I am not aware of any research.  I concur with uglyone about the scouting reports on Stroman.  The mainstream view that size could be an absolute barrier to being a successful starter over a career was way too doctrinaire. Clubs have rarely given shorter pitchers a chance, and when they have, those pitchers have often been successful.  If anything, shorter pitchers have been more successful (per opportunity) than taller pitchers.  A "projectable frame" will only carry you so far...

It is fair to say that after Stroman, Hutchison, Dickey and Buehrle, the options come with larger question marks.  Personally, I am happy with Hendriks as a 5th starter and Norris working his way up.  It would definitely be better to have another pitcher who was more or less major-league ready (e.g a Graveman or a Nolin) to be there in case of injury.  It's a weakness of the club. 

Mike Green, why the nod for Hendricks as the 5th man?  He looks like a classic AAAA guy to me and he got hit hard in his small sample size with the Jays - lots of deep fly balls from what I recall. 

Hendricks over Estrada?

Estrada has been a slow starter.  He's not a bad choice for a 6th starter, if Norris isn't ready and an injury strikes.

In his major league career, Hendriks has thrown 188 innings with an ERA of 5.92, a FIP of 5.05 and an xFIP of 4.52.  He's been a lot better than that in the high minors.  My best guess is that if you gave him 160 innings with the 2015 Blue Jays, he'd give you an ERA of 4.5 or so.  It's not great, but I'd start out with him.  However, if the club decides that Estrada looks good in spring training and they'd rather have him in the #5 reliever slot, that would work too. 

Interesting article at Fangraphs by Jeff Sullivan. 39% of 3 WAR players in 2014 were never listed on a BA top 100 prospect list.

Link

of course the flip side is 61% of all 3 WAR players in 2014 were listed on a BA top 100 prospect list.

Estrada as a SP:
2011: 41.1 IP, 3.70 ERA, 3.87 FIP, 3.55 xFIP
2012: 129.1 IP, 3.76 ERA, 3.33 FIP, 3.51 xFIP
2013: 128.0 IP, 3.87 ERA, 3.86 FIP, 3.63 xFIP
2014: 107.0 IP, 4.96 ERA, 5.73 FIP, 4.25 xFIP

If you're going to use FIP to determine the #5 starter, then Hendriks should not have any advantage over Estrada for that role. If I had to predict who has the better season of the two next season, I'd definitely go with Estrada.

If you want a short-term SP to cover the #5 spot, then Estrada is the only internal option that makes sense. If you want a high upside young arm, then Sanchez or Norris make sense. Hendriks should be considered an emergency starter, at best.

BA Top 100: http://www.baseballamerica.com/minors/top-100-prospects-tools-2/

18. D.Norris 60fb, 60sl, 50cv, 60ch, 50cm
27. A.Sanchez 70fb, 60cv, 60ch, 40cm
30. D.Pompey 55ht, 50pw, 60sp, 70df, 55arm
69. J.Hoffman 60fb, 60cv, 50sl, 60ch, 60cm

Thanks for the link, uglyone.  According to BA, Swihart has 50 speed- i.e. he's faster than J.P. Crawford.  I really don't know if that is so, but let's assume it is true.  It's funny that scouting people will often talk about the possibility of a  22 year old catcher with decent contact skills and a solid swing adding power, but much less often the relative certainty that he will lose speed. 

That's a good point about Estrada vs. Hendriks, SK in NJ.  My bias in favour of pitchers who throw strikes may play a role in the way I see it. 

I have a world of confidence in Russell Martin.  I am hoping that this year his input is sought out  and given significant weight by the coaching staff when it comes time to make any number of medium-time-frame pitching decisions (i.e. not whether a pitcher is finished for the day).  It's not the typical role of a catcher. 

Thanks for the link Gerry. We all knew that many unranked 100 list players did quite well.

I was guessing 15% or so for unranked players. Some moved too fast. For example D Gooden & J Olerud from the past and currently C Sale I suspect. On the various opinions on Stroman. Maybe he becomes as good or close to C Sale and P Martinez, who were a bit overlooked. I can always dream.
Y Cespedes would be too old to be a prospect. B Finnegan I suspect is on the 100 list this year, but I do not know how hard it is for a reliever to earn 3 WAR. Our A Loup is v good so if he cannot earn 3 WAR then that just adds to my not understanding WAR. But I still love all this baseball stuff even if I do not GET some of the deeper concepts.

interesting that the BA and FG top 20 prospects are virtually identical. the only difference is that FG includes Appel in their top 20, when he's 28th on FG. but the prospect booted out of BA'S top 20 for appel - schwarber- is ranked #21 on FG. So that's pretty solid confirmation for the top 20.

the lists diverge in a huge way after that, though - so much so that they're pretty much incomparable.

After watching Hendriks give up long fly ball after long fly ball last year, I"m hoping he isn't anywhere near our rotation anytime soon. Anything beyond a few emergency starts probably means the season has gone off the rails. Frankly, I'd prefer Redmond or Jenkins to him.

My preference for rotation spots after the top 4 would be:

5. Sanchez
6. Norris (in AAA)
7. Estrada
8. Jenkins
9. Hendriks

Even then, I'd probably prefer they give a shot to whoever in New Hampshire or Buffalo is showing the most instead of Hendriks. In case I hadn't belabored the point enough already, I just don't think his stuff plays as a starter at all. His profile from Brooks Baseball:

"Basic description of 2014 pitches compared to other RHP:
His sinker has less armside run than typical, has little sinking action compared to a true sinker and results in somewhat more flyballs compared to other pitchers' sinkers. His fourseam fastball results in more flyballs compared to other pitchers' fourseamers and has essentially average velo. His slider generates a very high amount of groundballs compared to other pitchers' sliders, has less than expected depth and has primarily 12-6 movement. His change is basically never swung at and missed compared to other pitchers' changeups, results in many more groundballs compared to other pitchers' changeups, is slightly firmer than usual and has slight armside fade. His curve generates more whiffs/swing compared to other pitchers' curves, results in more flyballs compared to other pitchers' curves and has slightly below average velo. "

I'd be open to the idea of him as a long man out of the pen, and maybe his average FB velo plays up a tick out there and he can be a strictly FB/Slider guy. But as it is, his flyball tendencies just do not mix well with the Rogers Center.

sounds like Pentecost is getting shoulder surgery. that sucks.

His second surgery on the shoulder this offseason. This one is just a "clean-up", done arthroscopically, and he should be throwing within 3 months. Still, it means a shorter season for him. The big thing, though, is how good the shoulder will be after the surgeries. Hopefully, it doesn't have a permanent impact on his throwing or hitting.

Pentecost also had surgery on his throwing shoulder in high school - suffice it to say, I'm not optimistic about his long term viability as a catcher, which would greatly reduce his value - ouch!

Maybe he'll follow the Delgado path and just skip the extra years in the minor trying to perfect catching.  It all depends on his bat.

I thought of Delgado too.  Pentecost would have to be a better defensive first baseman than Delgado for his bat to make sense there. He might very well be.

The scouting reports praise his athleticism and energy; I get the impression second base could also be possible.

I think I'm coming to accept that even though I disagree with it, the jays are going all in with the rookies this year. unless they have atrocious springs, they're all going to get first shot at those roster spots. we're gonna break camp looking like this:

1. SS Reyes
2. C Martin
3. RF Bautista
4. DH Encarnacion
5. 3B Donaldson
6. LF Saunders
7. 1B Smoak
8. 2B Travis
9. CF Pompey

B. UT Valencia
B. OF Pillar
B. IF Izturis
B. C Navarro



SP1 Stroman
SP2 Hutchison
SP3 Buehrle
SP4 Dickey
SP5 Norris

CL Cecil
SU Sanchez
SU Loup
MR Estrada
MR 3 of Redmond/Delabar/Hendriks/Jenkins/Rasmussen/etc.


and if the rooks can just hold their own, that could be one helluva team.

AA is trying to set up a team like we saw from 1983-1993 a team that has home grown all over it.  In 1983.
lineup...
2B: Damaso Garcia trade via Yankeees for minor pieces
LF: Dave Collins - acquired from the Yankees as part of the famous Fred McGriff trade
1b: Willie Upshaw  - gained via Rule 5 draft
DH: Cliff Johnson - traded for in exchange for Al Woods in the offseason of 82/83
RF: Jesse Barfield - his 2nd full season in the majors drafted in 1977 by the Jays.
CF: Lloyd Moseby - 3 bad years in his career at this point this was his first soilid year.  (0.4 WAR total over his first 3 years, 6 in '83, 7.2 in '84)
3B: Rance Mulliniks - acquired from KC for Phil Huffman.in what Gillick once said was his most forgetable trade
SS: Alfredo Griffin - blocking Tony Fernandez in themidst of a 5 year negtive WAR streak.while playing virtually every game.
CA: Ernie Whitt - expansion draft in '77
SP: Dave Stieb, - home grown should've won a few Cy's but rarely got votes due to low W totals.
RP: Roy Lee Jackson, - the 'closer'
Rest of roationt - Luis Leal, (home grown), Jim Gott (also home grown), Jim Clancy (via expansion draft in 77) - yes a 4 man rotation in '83 Doyle Alexander added when the Yankees released him.
bullpen - Randy Moffitt, Joey McLaughlin, Jim Acker, Dave Geisel, Mike Morgan, Stan Clarke, Matt Williams, Don Cooper. 
bench: Barry Bonnell, Garth Iorg, Jorge Orta, Buck Martinez, George Bell, Hosken Powell, Mickey Klutts (many in platoon roles), Tony Fernandez, Mitch Webster, Geno Petralli - lots of weaknesses there but this team won 89 games and would do so the following year as well before jumping to 99 when Fernandez & Bell were playing everyday and a few other key changes.  Mainly kids getting shots.

I'm watching the NFL combine at the moment and Jameis Winston is throwing. Made me wonder if the Jays might take a chance on him in one of the earlier rounds. Baseball is his best sports and his first love. Anthony Alford type deal?

per MLBTR, Jays have signed Chris Dickerson to a minor league invite. Lifetime OPS of 746 vs. RHP - could be a decent LH bat off the bench.

Uglyone, that's about how I see it.  I think that Santiago might end up as the backup middle infielder, on the basis that Izturis isn't really capable of handling shortstop.  I suspect also that they'll start the season with someone other than Norris in the 5 slot, but that he'll probably be there later in the season.  It wouldn't surprise me also if Barton has a good spring and he wins the first base job outright.  I know that I am in the minority about that. 

I think smoak gets a real shot no matter what. AA mentioned that his scouts still really like him, and this offseason has unearthed some interesting numbers that might back that up:

http://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/the-xhrfb-rate-underachievers/

"And here’s your deep sleeper in AL-Only leagues. Smoak was a massive disappointment during his Mariners career, victimized by a low BABIP and displaying just mediocre power for a first baseman. But until the fences were moved in at Safeco, that park was seriously pitcher friendly and really hampered Smoak’s performance. For his career, his home HR/FB rate was just 9.4% vs a 14.6% mark in away parks. His BABIP also jumped from just .238 at home to .281 away. Clearly, the park played a major role here. And now he gets to call home a park that sported 106 LHH and 110 RHH home run park factors. And check out this batted ball distance trend:

How delicious is that trend? And who woulda thunk that Smoak actually smoaked the ball in 2014, posting a distance mark that would have ranked 24th in baseball had he qualified for the leaderboard?"

Smoak has shown signs of brilliance in Seattle. It is just a matter of piecing it all together. I think it is a good gamble

I like this article on Norris.

http://www.today.com/news/meet-daniel-norris-major-league-baseball-player-who-lives-his-2D80504714

I am going to have a hard time picking a favorite Jay this year. Martin? Pompey? Norris? Stroman?

Dickerson is an excellent depth signing, as he fields well and hits righties.  He and Pillar can platoon at any outfield slot and be decent.  With Ezequiel Carrera and Dirks around also, there is plenty of protection should injury strike. 

That's a nice graph, uglyone.  Despite the batted ball distance, Smoak's career away line is .240/.316/.407, and he doesn't field well.  We'll see how he and Barton look in the spring.

I'm watching the NFL combine at the moment and Jameis Winston is throwing. Made me wonder if the Jays might take a chance on him in one of the earlier rounds. Baseball is his best sports and his first love. Anthony Alford type deal?

That is not true.

He was easily one of the top 5 college football players the last couple of years (even won a heisman).

Yet hit .235 last season..

He was named a 3rd team all star in baseball, which is nothing to shake a stick at.... But to say baseball is his best sport, is simply untrue..

From what Keith Law said about him as a baseball player, he had the raw athleticism to have a shot at being a pro, but hasn't developed any skills... Which is similar to Alford...

But in the case of Anthony Alford, I think it's clear he would rather have played football.... But it just wasn't happening for him...

Jameis is on recording saying baseball is his favourite sport. As a hitter, he's shit. As a pitcher...he's pretty good.
1.08 ERA
33.1 IP
31 SO
0.75 WHIP
1.89 BB9
8.37 SO9

I think Dickerson is about done. He'll be 33 in early April, and mediocre players usually have lost enough of their ability by that age to no longer be useful mlb players. His numbers the last 2 years are not very good at all, even against righties. He OPS'd .693 vs righties in 2013 and .639 vs righties in 2014. That might fall below .600 this year. If he gets any significant playing time, something is very wrong. Pillar should be able to outhit him by a fair margin, even vs righties.

I think Smoak could be an interesting player this year, as long as they don't put him in there against lefties. Valencia murders lefties, and Smoak is very unlikely to come close to Valencia's OPS against them. Valencia probably plays a better 1B than Smoak as well.

Mike, I have to say I don't get Barton - the last 4 seasons combined he's hit .216 in 510 AB's with only 4(!!) HR's. Aside from a good walk rate, I don't see anything that interests me there. He's like Adam Dunn with no power.

Barton was a terrific hitter when young.  He had shoulder surgery a few years ago, but to my very untrained eye, looked better last year.  He's only 29 and might have made a full recovery.  If he can hit .260 with a good walk rate and medium range power (and a better glove than Smoak's), they might have something. 

As for Dickerson, it's a bit strange that he never got any kind of more substantial shot.  He was a 2 WAR/1150G player over his career, but as a left-handed hitter without much power, he didn't fit in to the modern roster configuration with 7 or 8 relievers.

That's nice to see -- but it is hard to believe that it isn't within the season to season noise in batted ball distances. An increase in the average of 25 feet wouldn't take many toppers on the infield changed into long, lazy fly-balls to happen.

That said, I'm excited to see Smoak play. I think he'll hit, but I'm more concerned about his defense.

smoak career splits:

Home vRHP: 99wrc+
Away vLHP: 99wrc+

Home vLHP: 55wrc+
Away vLHP: 111wrc+

and he might be going from the toughest home park for rhh to the easiest.

Well, if Barton looked better, his numbers certainly didn't reflect that, he OPS'd just .410 in his 60 or so AB's. Obviously a very small sample size. Had a look at his stats from prior to the last 4 years. He became a regular in 2008, so I looked at 2008 to 2010. I still don't see a guy I would describe as a terrific hitter. His slash line is .254/.365/.384/.749 from those 3 years. Nice on base percentage, but from a first baseman, I think the overall picture is mediocre. Now, the best of those years was 2010, when he was 24 so maybe he was still on the upswing, and maybe he would have gotten better, and maybe if he hadn't hurt his shoulder he would have continued to improve, and maybe he has recovered somewhat from the shoulder problem. OK, I'll agree he's worth a look, but I'd want to see at least 2-3 months of really good hitting in Buffalo and not great production by Smoak before I'd consider him for the big leagues.

and he might be going from the toughest home park for rhh to the easiest.

With Encarnacion and Valencia at DH and 1B, does Smoak even figure to get many RH at-bats?

not on paper at this point, that's true.

seems like dwight smith jr is listed as an IF this spring, which means his conversion to 2b is a real thing now.

Any projected bench without Thole listed on it is pure fantasy at this point. We can debate who the backup MI and OF are based on who you think will end up the starting 2B and CF, but you should be penciling in Thole & Navarro on the bench and then working out from there. I don't see how Justin Smoak makes the team without an injury or trade; Gibby aint using a 6 man pen. Picking up Thole's 1.75m option signaled to me the team values his ability to catch Dickey, and didn't want to risk that he'd sign elsewhere if given the choice between two similar contracts.

The team might also want to keep Thole around in anticipation of a Navarro trade at some point. Navarro's trade value may go up this spring or summer if another team's C gets injured.

"Any projected bench without Thole listed on it is pure fantasy at this point."


hey I like living in fantasy land, but realistically the points you've made are totally valid.

Since Smoak is out of options, he either makes the team or is lost to another team at the end of the spring. If he plays well enough, the question will be is there be enough on the table coming back for AA to trade Navarro?

Now back in fantasy land, Martin actually shows he can catch Dickey well enough, thereby allowing Navarro and Smoak to both make it on the roster. Here's hoping, but yes chances are pretty slim.

No question AA is watching other teams catchers to see who gets hurt first this spring.  Once someone goes down  a trade could happen quickly.

Martin has said he is catching Dickey:

“I’m preparing that it’s going to be my job. Really, I don’t know why it shouldn’t (be).”

AA has said he has "no doubt" martin is catching dickey.

Gibbons has said thole is out of a job unless navarro is moved:

"If (Navarro) sticks around, somebody (Navarro or Martin) is going to have to learn how to catch a knuckleball. I don't see why they couldn't do that. "

gibbons and AA have also repeatedly mentioned a valencia/smoak platoon at 1B, and wanting to keep EE at dh.


what is so hard to understand here?

Navarro starting at DH would be terrible, and I don't think they have any plans on doing it. Edwin should DH, and Smoak/Valencia should be a defensive improvement at 1B over what the Jays have had there in recent years.

I think Thole should be the back-up catcher. Even if Martin catches Dickey, you still want someone on the bench who could catch him in case of emergency. Navarro isn't that guy.

Even if Martin catches Dickey, you still want someone on the bench who could catch him in case of emergency. Navarro isn't that guy.

I don't think the off-chance of Martin getting hurt mid-game during one of Dickey's thirty-odd starts is reason enough to get saddled with a zero-value backup catcher like Thole for the other 130 games.

Surely Navarro can handle a few emergency innings if needed, even at the cost of a few passed balls. If Martin is out for a while, then after the game you go find a Mike Nickeas or a George Kottaras who has caught the knuckleball off the scrap heap

I'm actually really hoping Dioner gets traded to free up bench slots and salary, but keeping Thole around simply as Plan B for Dickey seems like a waste

Consider that if Dickerson could hit better, he would be on a 25 man roster somewhere. As such, he's a depth player in the minors, to be called up as an injury replacement. The main thing required of replacement players is that they play good defense, and don't throw the game away with a costly error or mental mistake. This guy is well experienced, and he plays above average defense. Good pickup. Hope we don't need him.

Thole will catch one game every five days and won't be causing positional chaos by being a DH option for the manager. The difference between Thole and Navarro in a back-up catcher role is minimal at best. Go with the cheaper option who the manager won't feel compelled to put at DH some nights.

Jim Gott (also home grown)

Gott was actually another Rule 5 guy.

Yoan Moncada signs with Boston, reported. I have mixed feelings about this. On the plus side, it restricts the Red Sox from signing international talent for more than 300k for the next 2 signing periods (next year and the year after). HOWEVER, since they're over their spending limits, they can still spend freely this period. Do they steal Vladdy Jr from the Jays? On the downside, they acquire an amazing talent.

I don't think Guerrero can sign till the next signing period.

Red Sox sign Moncada for $31.5m but pay 100% tax so it's actually double that amount. No way the Jays we're going to spend $63m on a prospect (albeit one with tremendous upside). Too bad the Dodgers or Cubs couldn't get him.

I look forward to the implementation of an international draft.

The Red Sox have some serious young talent. Sigh...

I have to say though, if I was a cubs fan, I would be excited about the future. They could use a couple more young arms though...

Like I needed another reason to hate the red sox. I just hope they blow through a couple billion dollars before their next world series.

moncada is a serious talent. i think kiley said he'd slot in the #5-15 range on his list.

but man, $63m for 19yr old prospect seems a bit much, no? that kid has to be real good, real fast to make that a value deal.

"Thole will catch one game every five days and won't be causing positional chaos by being a DH option for the manager. The difference between Thole and Navarro in a back-up catcher role is minimal at best. Go with the cheaper option who the manager won't feel compelled to put at DH some nights."

much more utility in having a league average hitter like navarro available for 200-300pa (as backup C, PH, and injury fill in) off the bench than a useless bat like thole.

our bench combined for 1996pa, last year - 500pa per bench slot. having navarro hit for thole there is a huge upgrade.

"Thole will catch one game every five days and won't be causing positional chaos by being a DH option for the manager. The difference between Thole and Navarro in a back-up catcher role is minimal at best. Go with the cheaper option who the manager won't feel compelled to put at DH some nights."

If the GM doesn't trust the Manager for simple decisions, you've got nothing.  So, let's say the club starts out the season with Encarnacion as the DH, Smoak as the first baseman and a bench of Pillar, Izturis (with Travis playing second base), Valencia and either Thole or Navarro.  Encarnacion becomes unavailable for a few days due to injury/illness/paternity leave/whatever.  The club is facing a few RHPs in a row.  Wouldn't you prefer to have Navarro DHing as compared with Thole or Valencia or Izturis? Or what happens if Martin has to go on the DL?  Wouldn't it be better to have Navarro around to take on the everyday catching role? Depth is a virtue, and depth behind the plate is especially good because catchers are disproportionately likely to be injured. 

I have the same reservations about Gibbons' managerial decision-making as many, but once the club decided to renew his contract, the best thing is to trust that he may have learned something rather than intentionally planning to withhold valuable tools from him on the basis that he is likely to misuse them.

Looks like Dustin McGowan is headed to the Dodgers. For league freaking minimum. $1m bonus for making the roster (I think), up to $1.5M for 60 appearances/innings. Did he seriously want out of Toronto? Or do we not even have league-minimum $$ left to sign anyone?

Dang if only the Dodgers had been willing to screw up their signing anyone post July 1st... then it would've been aces for the Jays - less competition post jUly 1st and he'd be in the NL.  Lets hope he isn't all-that.  also in the note I saw Yadier Alvares & Vladimir Gutierrez  (both pitchers) cannot sign until July 1st - Angels, Diamondbacks, Rays, Red Sox and Yankees are all over their limits thus no big free agents intenationally post july 1st for them. 

mcgowan was really bad last year.

McGowan was bad in the rotation last year, but merely so-so in the bullpen.  Opponents hit .213/.284/.405 off him when he was relieving.  That's not great, but with a 15% HR/FB rate out of the pen, you could hope that he might do a letter better this year. 

I had concern with McGowan being used out of the rotation last year in light of his injury history.  The Dodgers will surely just leave him in the pen in a low leverage role (at least to start).  He will probably be fine. 

I would have loved D McGowan back. It will be interesting to see how his career plays out. Good luck Dustin.

Looks like we will sink or swim with youth. Our depth is youth in a lot of positions. At least they have solid upside. But quite a few have to come through at a very young age.

A bad day for the jays - I just wished Moncada had signed with the Dodgers - to keep him out of the AL East and to knock the Dodgers out of the next IFA signing period when presumably the Jays will be spending over the limit - apparently, according to their GM,the Dodgers passed partly because they are eyeing the talent pool in the next IFA period- shucks

I am surprised that AA hasn't been able to move Navarro yet - he's had lots of time - if I were in Navarro's shoes, I would have also requested a trade and be an unhappy camper - regulated to a bench guy will likely cost Navarro millions on his next contract and he did sign with the expectation of being the everyday catcher - the jays need to move him before opening day.

Nice new TV Deal for the Diamondbacks, sure covers possible GM deficiencies. Only Signing Bonus applies this year, with actual Deal starting next year. Sure makes the "reported" Rogers Deal look tiny.

Richard S.S. "Nice new TV Deal for the Diamondbacks, sure covers possible GM deficiencies. Only Signing Bonus applies this year, with actual Deal starting next year. Sure makes the "reported" Rogers Deal look tiny."

I read the Arizona TV deal is said to be over $90,000,000 per annum. What is the "reported" Roger's deal?

I think Rogers said they lost money on their cable....

Does anyone know, if I buy the MLB Network can I watch out of market broadcasts of the Jays games? For example, if they play Boston, can I watch the game on the Boston feed?

Seeing what other teams rake in for their broadcast rights makes me not want to watch hockey on the Rogers Sportsnet.

hockey OR baseball

Best guess on the Rogers' TV Deal is $39.0 MM. Primetime Sports McCowan was the last to remark on it sometime last year. But the problem is that Rogers is just paying Rogers, from one pocket to another. So that figure, as with most Jay Team figures is numbers that can be anything they want.

I fully believe Rogers' Jays Team could outspend every other Team, if it was so desired. Fair Market value TV Deal should be $75.0 MM - $125.0 MM, or more. Team share of the MLB Network TV Deals are big, at least double the previous deals. Add in Attendance, Concessions, Souvenirs and Programs; plus all profits from all other Rogers Center (SkyDome) events. The total numbers could be anything they need them to be.

Rogers Media (that operates the Blue Jays) is only about 10% of Rogers Communications. Their margins are also very thin. That Sportsnet would subsidize the Blue Jays is asinine, and also likely subject to review by MLB.

I think what is more likely is that sport advertising dollars do not flow as freely north of the 49th parallel as they do to the south.

much more utility in having a league average hitter like navarro available for 200-300pa (as backup C, PH, and injury fill in) off the bench than a useless bat like thole.

Except Navarro does not want to be a back-up or a DH and wants to be traded. Will it take a fist fight with Gibby?

Rogers Media (that operates the Blue Jays) is only about 10% of Rogers Communications. Their margins are also very thin. That Sportsnet would subsidize the Blue Jays is asinine, and also likely subject to review by MLB.

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

That's a novel view. Rogers Corp (known as Rogers Communications) owns 110% of everything under it's umbrella that's not named MLSE. If it's become a Multi-National Corp, then everything is or could be different. Last time I looked, Rogers Media was under the umbrella. Even though Rogers Media is not as big a portion of Rogers Corp as it would like, it's huge. Research has no fixed budget, but everyone else does. Cost certaincy is necessary in year-to-year operation. Profit is paramount, it rules all.

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

Rogers Corp can spend anything it wants to because MLB can't prevent it. Is that prudent? Probably not, but only probably. When dealing with Billions, tens of Billions and possibly hundreds of Billions, hundreds of Million are mostly insignificant. Why? Content is King.

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

From very early March until very late October (eight months), Baseball generates content. Besides broadcasting Games, there are Pre-Game Shows and Post-Game shows. There are Baseball-specific Shows daily and weekly. Besides the Blue Jays, there is just MLB Baseball to deliver more content. Rogers can sell advertising on it all and that could be Billions involved. Ignoring the 'Star of the Show' is not wise.

Except Navarro does not want to be a back-up or a DH and wants to be traded. Will it take a fist fight with Gibby?

Navarro can't afford to sulk. He's a good-not-great player hitting free agency at the end of the season. He doesn't have a long track record as a starter - 2014 was the first time he started 100+ games since 2009. He's unlikely to be many teams' first-choice as a catcher, and many might see him the same way the Jays do now - good enough for the moment, but not so good you don't keep your eyes open for other options.

It's true that being relegated to part-time status will hurt his market value. But being labelled a clubhouse malcontent might hurt it more.

Toronto's decisions this Spring will have far-reaching effects.

If Russell never gets hurt, Thole has little value. Otherwise, he's very necessary and very valuable. Josh Thole becomes the 26th Man. Much too valuable to release, so how do you keep him?

Danny Valencia is half a hitting Stud and barely Replacement Hitter the other half. Defensively he's good enough at 1B and 3B. Properly used (if Smoak makes the Team), he's a big asset, otherwise he's a decent piece for the Bullpen. How do we maximize his value to the Team?

Ryan Goins can't hit much of anything, not even at replacement levels. He does , on the other hand, give All-Star Defense at 2B and SS, on turf. That's really valuable. Ryan is said to use a long bat and have a long swing. Could changing any of that make him better? If Devon Travis makes the Team, Ryan Goins doesn't, and that's sad.

Steve Tolleson plays 2B and 3B well enough defensively and like Valencia, hits LHP well, but is at least replacement level verses RHP. That has value, but can we keep him?

EE may be playing 1B regularly, with some time at DH. I believe that there is some kind of issue that is unknown regarding positions that players play, in the sense that there is too much over thinking which led to guessing.

I remember a few years ago Bautista played almost exclusively at 3B during ST. This was before B Lawrie arrived. It did not take long for him to be back in RF. I am not sure who was destined for RF in place of Bautista. Most likely Bautista moved due to the fast progress of Lawrie.

Happy Honus Day.  I love his age 41 line- 156 games, 625 PAs,  .274/.325/.422 (good for a 127 OPS+ in 1915), and still a good baserunner and shortstop.  Now that's what I call aging gracefully.

Danny Valencia is half a hitting Stud and barely Replacement Hitter the other half. Defensively he's good enough at 1B and 3B. Properly used (if Smoak makes the Team), he's a big asset, otherwise he's a decent piece for the Bullpen. How do we maximize his value to the Team?

Play him as much as possible vs LHP. Play him as little as possible vs RHP. Do not use him in the bullpen.

Play him as much as possible vs LHP. Play him as little as possible vs RHP. Do not use him in the bullpen.

Unless Valencia is used as the 7th man in the pen for blowouts, allowing both only six real relievers and five bench spots (including Valencia). Some sort of setup like this with a Brooks Kieschnick-type would be all kinds of awesome

Agreed if any of the bench guys can throw strikes regularly and get the odd guy out then he'd be extremely valuable as the mop up guy in the pen plus a backup hitter.

Sorry guys I was referring to the Bench not the Bullpen. Incidentally can anyone on the projected Bench pitch?

I'm confident that Edwin will DH if Smoak/Valencia are in the lineup. Gibbons can't be clueless enough to think EE is a better defensive option than those guys.

Of course, Navarro will get way too many AB's, and that will need to come as a DH, so that's probably when Edwin will play the field.

To state the obvious, Alex needs to trade Navarro ASAP. Under no circumstances should he be a starting DH on any team looking to make the playoffs.

Under no circumstances should [Navarro] be a starting DH on any team looking to make the playoffs.

I agree that Navarro shouldn't be the primary DH. But he's outhit Smoak over the past two years, and Smoak barely even deserved to be in the majors last year. Smoak has more upside, but if the Jays can't fix him, Navarro's bat will look pretty good.

Meanwhile, the Royals made it to the World Series with Billy Butler as their DH, and he was no better than Navarro. And the A's managed to snag a wild card while giving DH time to the likes of Callaspo & Jaso. So there are worse things than Dioner Navarro, Designated Hitter.

people overrate DHs. there's basically three standout DHs - ortiz, martinez, cruz - but they're all old and can breakdown at any time. the rest are s collection of slightly above average bats that haven't significantly out hit navarro the past couple years. and many that have outhit him have needed strict platoon protection to do it.

that being said, EE is our DH, and the best DH in baseball.

There are four hitters on the Jays that I consider "One of the very best at the position in all of Baseball": Jose Bautista at RF; Russell Martin at C; Josh Donaldson at 3B; and last but not least, Edwin Encarnacion at D.H. No one else, not even Pitchers come faintly close.

The next tier down on this team: Michael Saunders at LF and Jose Reyes at SS, look to hit fairly well with decent power. If Jose Reyes was solidly average to slightly better defensively, he might be in the above group properly. Michael Saunders needs to hit like Melky, walk like Bautista and homer like Edwin to get up there and he might.

Possibly Justin Smoak will have value as he should have big power here and might hit well enough to stay. If Dioner Navarro stays, he hits well and has power, so will be a big asset.

The Jays have said that EE is going to be the team's primary first baseman. This makes some sense, as the team is going to need to get Navarro into the lineup and rotate Reyes and others through the DH slot from time to time to give them a break from playing the field. Still, it would be better to have EE as the primary DH and a decent hitter and good fielder playing 1B.

http://m.bluejays.mlb.com/news/article/110173592/toronto-blue-jays-plan-on-using-edwin-encarnacion-at-first-base

http://m.bluejays.mlb.com/news/article/110272514/alex-anthopoulos-expects-toronto-blue-jays-will-deal-dioner-navarro

Did you read this one too? Dioner's time with the organization is limited according to A.A.

Thanks greenfrog & Richard SS. I read both articles.

I agree with Richard, that Navarro may be traded. The latest could be the July 31 trade deadline. Any date after that and his trade value would be diminished IMO.
Before he is dealt, if Martin gets injured, he stays to catch. If EE gets injured then he is a DH or 1B option and also still a trade chip.

If his ABs are a significant amount, but not as the full time catcher he could feel unhappy and frustrated. I would expect that, but hopefully it would not affect the team morale. The possibility exists that batting without the wear and tear of full time catching could make him a better hitter because he would be physically more fit. But then again, the mental/emotional negative effect of not being the full time catcher could make him not hit well and that could create a snowball effect.

I missed this fine remembrance of Bill Monbouquette by Bruce Markusen in THT.   I had heard of Pumpsie Green's rough treatment by the Red Sox manager (Pinky Higgins) before, but did not know of Monbouquette's backing of Green.  I am pleased to say that it was a bit before my time!

Navarro wants to be traded to a Team where he could be the Number One Catcher. He needs full time ABs so he can market himself as a Starting Catcher next year. It limits his earning potential if he can't.

I think the solution to keep Navarro happy is very simple. Sign him, or offer to sign him to a three year $12.0 MM contract extension, and pay him $4.0 MM a year through '16-'18. That should keep him happy, and let the Team have a very good backup available to fill in for Martin. If that's not acceptable, then trade him to anyone who wants him - 'my way or the highway'.

That long term deal makes sense Richard.

But then a lot of money is being spent on catching ie 1 position.

For those Bauxites that believe that the payroll is not that big a factor because " if we need the money it will be there". I believe that payroll is shrinking. Player X lets say M Buehrle at 13, 15 or 17 mil is the same player but the payroll is not the same. This is some sort of relativity concept.

If Pompey can produce as well or better than his predecessor and Sanchez & Norris as rotation parts can produce as well as Happ and Morrow then the payroll is reduced significantly because they all get the Major League minimum. But the team has not improved or got worse and we still go into 2016 without Buehrle.
I see Buehrle as a constant and hope that he can give us a 3rd year as good as the first 2.
All that money can be used. Maybe even well.

In 2017 EE & Bautista will be off the books. Hopefully we get 2 good years from them. If so their loss IMO will not be replaced. There is nobody out there as good talent wise that we can get. FAs do not come here. Money wise the cost may double.

A v good pitcher Buehrle will be off the payroll next year. So we lose a valuable rotation part but $19 mil more available to the payroll .

For all 3 players leaving we get a draft choice most likely.

Fun article at the Sun...http://www.torontosun.com/2015/02/24/adam-lind-opens-up-about-time-with-blue-jays
The more things change...
He (Lind) also fielded ground balls at first, where manager Ron Roenicke said Lind will play every day — “until he shows he can’t hit left-handers.”  At least us Jay fans don't have to suffer through watching Lind swing helplessly when a LHP is on the mound anymore.

just be patient with navarro. a lot of teams are gambling on completely unproven catchers right now. they'll be looking for a starting catcher soon enough.

p.s. time for a new thread?

and LOL at Lind's new manager making the same mistake.

from twitter it sounds like martin was catching dickey in front of the media this morning.....and everyone is happy with how it went.

not a surprise to me, but it should be a relief to some.

As to losing Bautista and Encarnacion after the 2016 season, I think A.A.'s gambles for replacing them might possibly work. Right now it costs nothing to find out.

Anthopoulos has been after Michael Saunders from a few years now. He thinks that away from Safeco Field, he'll hit better. I think so too. Saunders has said he's made changes to how he hits in 2014. If that carries through, he will hit better. He defends well, plays all three OF positions if needed and steals bases. If, as I believe, he can hit 25-30 HRs, he'll be an adequate substitute when needed.

Justin Smoak is another Player A.A. has been interested for some time. Safeco Field is reported to kill offense for some to most players. The way the Jays struggle there, I can believe that. Justin defends 1B well, picking balls out of the dirt and has a big wingspan for corralling errant throws. He is limited in range, but he has big power and can't hit well. If he hits well enough to make the Team and I believe he will, he could hit 30-40 HRs regularly. If Safeco messed Smoak up, we could have something special. If not, it's only a one year $1.0 MM deal.

If those two reach the potential hoped for, then 2017 is solved. If not, useful assets remain. If really wrong, then they can be Non-tendered after the season. Basically minimal risk.

That Lind article is a good one. Lind expresses himself clearly but politely and comes across as a good guy. Hope he has a good season.

and LOL at Lind's new manager making the same mistake

Almost 900 PAs of a 212/257/331 slash line is clearly not enough evidence. Rick Nicholls fully supports this position.