I think it was always going to be unreasonable to assume that Hoffman would come back and instantly be elite. I'll be worried if he hasn't shown progress in September or next April but for now I just want him to show us that the velocity has returned and show no signs of injury.

Nobody has said anything about Phil Coke being called up.

It smells of desperation...

Send Pentacost and a couple mid range prospects to Philly for Papelbon and let's stop this half ass stuff. Are the Jays in? Or are they worried about 2020?

he's also showing quality quality stuff... the consistency will come

Nobody has said anything about Phil Coke being called up.

Check the Blue Jays vs. Marlins thread.  The thumbs were down, for a variety of very good reasons. 

Not all the thumbs were down.  And the evidence is mixed, not necessarily as overwhelmingly negative as Mike implies.

i fear the overhype on hoffman. he's got a huge arm, obviously, but not a huge arsenal and his college stats weren't dominant. Harris' line this year was better than hoffmann last year, at the same age.

expectations should be tempered a wee bit at least.

"....Send Pentacost and a couple mid range prospects to Philly for Papelbon...."

If that would get it done, of course the Jays should do it.  But remember that he is owed $13-million for 2016, under a vesting contract that is almost certain to be triggered (unless the Jays refuse to let him close games, which would be manipulative).  The Phillies might be willing to kick in some money for this year, but the 2016 contract could become quite a burden for the Jays, especially when Papelbon is already 34 and in danger of decline.  But of course, if the prospects and money can be finessed, the Jays should do it.  In the meantime, what's wrong with auditioning Coke, especially if he can be auditioned in low-leverage situations against LHB?   I fail to see any reason why the Jays shouldn't at least check him out.

Some people questioned Coke's ability and some questioned the need for an 8 man pen (especially in light of the day off and the recent performance of the starters).  I didn't see anybody who thought that the transactions as a whole were a good idea. Whether the addition of a third lefthander into a now 8 man pen was a sign of desperation or just confusion, I'll leave to someone else. 

Why was Hoffman sent to high A so quickly? Weather?

"....Whether the addition of a third lefthander into a now 8 man pen was a sign of desperation or just confusion, I'll leave to someone else...."

You don't acknowledge even the conceivable possibility that Coke has a chance to be better than Schultz or Tepera?  And that the Jays might decide to keep 2 of those 3 relievers, rather than keeping all 3 of them in an indefinite 8-man pen as you seem to assume?

High A is not an uncommon first stop for high talent college draftees.

He was pretty good through 4IP, no runs, 2H, 2BB, 2K. Got into trouble in the 5th.

OK.  Let me clarify.  I don't have strong opinions on whether Phil Coke or Bo Schultz is a better choice for the 7th spot in the pen, and I don't think that it matters very much at all.  I do feel strongly that it is a mistake to have an 8 man pen rather than a backup middle infielder who ideally can hit right-handed.  Setting up a situation where Russ Martin ends up playing second base again is not good planning. 

Send Pentacost and a couple mid range prospects to Philly for Papelbon

I think that deal is called Christmas in Philly. That deal is beyond desperate. To me it would make a lot more sense (though hardly any sense at all) to trade Hoffman and more for years of Dan Duguette than it would to make that deal for Jonathon Papelbon.

Max Pentecost.  Drew Hutchison. Just a reminder about the spelling of names.

coke's career fip and xfip vLHH are down around 3. don't mind giving him a shot as a loogy.

Hoffmann is actually still old for his level, so A+ is definitely not rushing him.

For those concerned about Hoffman, go back and take a look at what Osuna did after his TJ. IIRC, results weren't pretty at all.

Hoffman was clocked at 99, it's the command and control that take time to return. Not worried at all yet.

Setting up a situation where Russ Martin ends up playing second base again is not good planning.

For a while I defended the 8th man in the pen, particularly in the early season, but at this point the only purpose is to enable unnecessary pitching changes which will often not work. It's going to be a feature of having Gibbons as manager that when the front office defers to who he wants for the final spot on the roster for upcoming series, he'll usually choose the extra pitcher to allow himself a maximum number of pitching changes. To me, there's not much point anymore in debating its wisdom as it's something we ought to expect. Worst of all, I suspect that Gibbons over-values the one-on-one with Coke/Ortiz from years gone by. I'd rather have the extra infielder too, but as someone wise once said, that's not how Gibbons rolls.

"....I do feel strongly that it is a mistake to have an 8 man pen rather than a backup middle infielder who ideally can hit right-handed..."

That's a fair point, but the same situation prevailed in Wednesday's game (no back-up middle infielder) and I don't recall you complaining at the time.  It's not an ideal bench, but perfectly tolerable for a couple of games, if the Jays feel the need for a short-term reinforcement of another part of the roster.  In any event, I don't see any evidence that the 8-man pen is anything more than a very temporary move, probably intended to help the bullpen to neutralize Ortiz and Sandoval in the current series.  It would be very easy for the Jays to demote Schultz or Tepera within the next few days, restoring the 7-man pen and making room for a middle infielder.  In the meantime, they can audition Coke.

Of course Papelbon would be a better solution, but the cost in prospects and money would be significant, and any trade could take a while to finalize. In the meantime, nothing wrong with experimenting with other bullpen options, especially in low-leverage or situational opportunities.   Some people scoffed at the use of Copeland as a 7th reliever earlier this season, but he turned out to be a useful spot starter.

Why would you call this as "beyond desperate"?  And why would it make more sense to give up a higher rated prospect and more for someone who won't actually help the on-field Jays win games?

"For those concerned about Hoffman, go back and take a look at what Osuna did after his TJ. IIRC, results weren't pretty at all."

absolutely. but hoffman hype is a lot different than osuna hype.

As for the MI, agree it would be more beneficial than an 8th pitcher.

Not mentioned in the Dunedin game report was Tolleson hitting leadoff, albiet as DH. So the 8 man pen should be short-lived and the Jays will have their backup MI soon.

Not sure what needed to be clarified. It was clear in the other thread that the problem was with the roster construction, not Phil Coke. Coke is a very smart addition to this roster.

"That's a fair point, but the same situation prevailed in Wednesday's game (no back-up middle infielder) and I don't recall you complaining at the time."

Yes, nobody complained when a starting pitcher was injured and the team needed a body to fill that spot, because we all understand that it's in the team's best interests to not DL Sanchez if all he needs is to miss one start. That situation is in no way analogous to calling up an 8th reliever after an off-day with an already well-rested bullpen. Gibbons has very little trust in Schultz or Tepera, so the better move would have been to switch one of them with Coke and then call up a different 8th reliever should Hutchison or Dickey falter early.

uglyone, could you elaborate on the hype comment, please? I'm not disagreeing, I just don't understand the point you're making.

though to pick closer through Osuna's comeback last year.

Starts 1-3: 11.9k/9, 6.5bb/9, 8.64era, 6.39fip
Starts 4-7: 12.5k/9, 2.0bb/9, 5.27era, 2.66fip

So Osuna did have some control problems coming back but he fixed them pretty quickly, and was striking guys out like crazy from the getgo. and he was 19, not 22 like hoffman.

My bigger concern with Hoffman is that despite his big arm he didn't have eye popping K numbers in college and isn't sttiking anyone out in milb so far (5.9k/9).


that being said, comparing anyone to osuna is unfair. osuna is awesome.

"uglyone, could you elaborate on the hype comment, please? I'm not disagreeing, I just don't understand the point you're making."

i get the sense that people have mentally slotted him in as a clear stud prospect, clear #1 in our system, top 10 prospect type guy and i'm not sure he's that.

Papelbon is being paid at top-of-market for an elite closer. While he's been quite good, he's not in the Kimbrel / Chapman level of dominance. At best, he's being paid what the current market would allow. Also, his velocity has diminished in recent years (as velocity tends to for mid-30s relievers), increasing his risk profile. This is especially important with that vesting option / no-trade clause bargaining chip.

He would look good at the back of the Jays pen (freeing up Cecil to get higher leverage outings, which is the true benefit), but Pentacost plus a couple mid-tiers would be nuts.

I'd add to the true benefit - keeping the stress off Osuna, who Gibbons is going to ride like American Pharoah if the team is in contention through the summer.

I strongly doubt AA would acquire Papelbon without massive salary relief, so it's tough to discuss what it would take without knowing the dollars being covered.

Thanks, uglyone. Makes sense.

Part of my thought for Papelbon for Pentacost + + is that Pentacost's value in trade must be depressed notably from his injuries. I feel he'd have better to hold onto to let him return to health.

"....Pentacost plus a couple mid-tiers would be nuts...."

Not if it made the difference in getting the Jays into the playoffs this year.  Which it might.

Agreed on Osuna as well, 92-93. Part of that has been because of Loup's early season struggles - Osuna is now the preferred option for late game lefties, and freeing Cecil up from the closer role would help that.

Yes, nobody complained when a starting pitcher was injured and the team needed a body to fill that spot, because we all understand that it's in the team's best interests to not DL Sanchez if all he needs is to miss one start.

Absolutely.  Even if Sanchez wasn't really "injured", but just more sore than usual, I completely approve of a decision to skip him in the rotation once and the resulting day without a middle-infield backup.  For me, this was a sign of intelligent managing of a rotation. 

Not if it made the difference in getting the Jays into the playoffs this year. Which it might.

That assumes a false binary choice, that Papelbon is the only option, and its outcome, playoffs. We won't know that until the end of the year, though. All the move would do is increase the chances incrementally, at notable cost, and should be judged accordingly and relative to other options. If you're paying 2/3 of the cost for Chapman, for example, why not go all-in and get his higher level of dominance for two seasons, and add in a possible compensation pick to boot (since he's one of the few closers who might merit a qualifying offer)?

"....calling up an 8th reliever after an off-day with an already well-rested bullpen...."

This is an endless debate, which has been going on for years, so it's probably pointless to belabor the argument.  But if I can be permitted just one more post on the subject:

The essential point here is that an 8th reliever's function is not simply to "rest" the bullpen.  It doesn't actually matter if the bullpen is "well-rested" or not.  The point is that Gibbons wants an additional option for pitching match-ups in a particular series.  He likes to have match-up options, and sometimes he wants 8 options in the bullpen, rather than 7 options.  If some of those 8 relievers end up being unused in a game or series, it doesn't necessarily negate the strategy.  There's a big difference between "unused" and "useless" -- just as your auto insurance policy isn't "useless" if it is "unused."  The essential tradeoff is this:  1) the advantage of having an 8th match-up option in the bullpen, which Gibbons finds useful, versus:  2) the advantage of having an additional bench bat for late-inning pinch-hitting moves (or injuries).  Both have value.  Gibbons prefers the former over the latter in this particular game or series. Some people assume it's an open-and-shut case that he must be wrong.  I'd say both sides of the tradeoff could have merit and I don't think it's necessarily obvious that he must be wrong.

That would all make sense if Gibbons viewed Tepera (and Schultz) as an option for something other than the lowest of leverage situations. He does not. At some point it's on AA to say to his manager that if he doesn't trust certain relievers the team would be better off with another bat/glove/speed option.

Stroman 24
Hutchison 24
Sanchez 22
Norris 22
Hoffman 22
Harris 21
Osuna 20
Castro 20

Travis 24
Pompey 22
Smith 22
Alford 20
Jansen 20
Tellez 20
Davis 20
Urena 19
Guerrero 17


In general, i think we can comfortably afford to give up a couple of very good prospects in order to get a legit 5op of the rotation sp and a topnotch rp....especially if they're on multi year deals.

"This is an endless debate, which has been going on for years, so it's probably pointless to belabor the argument."

Yes it is beyond beating the dead horse.

We understand Gibbons likes having options in the bullpen. It's just that most here, appear disagree with his preference of extra arm in pen vs bat. In light of the circumstances (day off, rested pen) broke the proverbial Camel's back and needed to vent again.

Just to throw a few more names into the discussion, since the Brewers might be selling soon:

Gerardo Parra rumoured to be available, swings lefty, plays great OF D, pushes Pillar into 4th OF role.  Jonathan Broxton getting killed by HR/FB, despite not giving up that many FBs, good underlying peripherals of the non-luck variety.  K-Rod also there.

Jays also have a recent history of trading with the Brewers, so one could hope that could be a possibility.  They also have struggling veteran SPs likely available (Lohse, Garza), though not sure I'd want to invest in those.

There's also Tyler Clippard, who may or may not be available. As a FA-to-be he's the least expensive target, prospect-wise with salary this year similar to Chapman. Oakland does seem to be hanging in at present, but there's still time for that to change.

".....That assumes a false binary choice, that Papelbon is the only option...."

That's why I said "might" rather than "will."   Yes, there are other options, and Chapman is a good option too.  I'm just saying that it might be worth giving up a couple of prospects if it greatly strengthens the team's chances this year.   (And if the team isn't saddled with a full $13-million salary in 2016.)  I guess I'm thinking of a Kent/Cone situation here, if it can be done.  Flags fly forever. 

There's really no doubt that the bullpen is the obvious target for an upgrade at this stage of the season.  The Jays have a league-leading 10 blown saves this year (in just 16 opportunities).   An upgrade in the bullpen would be far more effective (and realistically achievable) than a trade at any other roster spot.  That's also why the Jays have to keep experimenting with other bullpen options, including Phil Coke.

 

I would have little problem with an 8 man bullpen if Gibbons actually trusted the people in the back end of it in a situation that wasn't very low leverage. As constructed, it's pointless.

"I guess I'm thinking of a Kent/Cone situation here, if it can be done. Flags fly forever."

Yes if it's Cueto we're talking about, it changes the discussion. However, we're talking about Papelbon and I just don't see the added the value of him into the bullpen worth the assumed cost, even if the bullpen is the weakest link on this team.

People always have said that Gibbon's strength has been managing the bullpen. After all these years with him, I'm not so sure. Once you've gained his trust, you'll get used and ridden hard, otherwise you'll be a forgotten man and only used in blowouts. This winds up meaning 2-3 guys will be overworked and the others will get used once in a blue moon.

"Rarely used" is not the same as "useless."

"....Once you've gained his trust, you'll get used and ridden hard...."

But I think the Jays have also shown a capacity to adjust fairly quickly.  Castro was ridden hard in the early games, he was ineffective and then he was demoted. Pompey was ridden hard for weeks, then demoted.  Delabar was demoted last year.  Francisco was benched last year.  Early success doesn't guarantee that you'll be trusted indefinitely.

And there are still critics who say that the Jays should have "ridden harder" on players such as Snider or Pompey, rather than trading them or demoting them.  If you ride them or abandon them, you'll still be criticized.

It's always interesting when you get pedantic about words nobody used.

Right, but your justification was completely post hoc, which does no help in seeing if it's the best move available (considering both cost and opportunity) now. Equivocating with "might" vs "will" doesn't change that. If I buy a loaf of bread for $20 because I was really hungry, need doesn't erase my dramatic over-pay for that bread. In this case, it's compounded by $2 loafs on the next shelf that would have done a similar job... and a $30 loaf that would last a couple days, fresh as the first bite, and then you can reuse the mesh bag to catch a fish... or something. Chapman really knows how to break an analogy.

There are tonnes of ways to help the bullpen. Adding a closer to free up Cecil is one, and wouldn't even require an elite closer... just an option that's not reminiscent of Kevin Gregg. There are several potential options that are probably out there that could cover this: Papelbon, Chapman, Francisco Rodriguez, Axford, Clippard,

A second avenue to go would be to bring in a late inning lefty. This category include potential options like Scrabble, Mike Dunn and Oliver Perez.

Also, as Jevant mentioned above, I'd be quite interested in taking a low-cost flyer on Broxton to see if he can turn it around. He could be the 2015 reliever equivalent of McCarthy. Addison Reed is also interesting as a buy-low possibility.

"If you ride them or abandon them, you'll still be criticized."

Yes it's always easy to sit on the couch and do as such. My only point was that I'm not sure that Gibbon's bullpen management is that strong or better than others. I'd like a manager that had more balance in his bullpen, I don't want a small group of overworked guys and rest just sitting there talking shop. It's ok to have one Redmond lying around to soak up innings to be used in a blowout, it's another thing when you have about four of them.

"Flags fly forever"

Can we stop with this please? We have two flags from the world series in 92/93...if trading away top prospects and/or potential hall-of-famers-to-be for a 2 month rental player was worth it, then technically nobody should be pining for us to make that type of trade again, since 'flags fly forever'...but of course that's not that case...flags don't fly forever because fans don't live stuck in a moment...I think I speak for most fans who would want a sustained, perennial winner with a chance at the playoffs, and only if there is excess talent would you give it away for a rental, otherwise it compromises the future, which is always the focus since, flags do not fly forever, imho

Teams 10+ games out of 1st in their division: Oakland, Philly, Cincinnati, Milwaukee (furthest out at 17).
7+ out (so close to falling out of it): Miami, Colorado, Arizona, Cleveland
Those are the most likely sources for trades imo.

But, Flags do fly forever. Trading a future HOF type player like Kent was 100% worth it, because, Flags fly Forever.

I'm all for trading for Cueto, but re: Paps, I'd rather take on salary for some B level prospects. Rogers has a legit opportunity in front of them, they have to spend a little bit of cash here.

To follow up, I don't think anybody is saying a Franchise's goal is to win WS and then stop trying. The point is, giving up future talent is worth it if you can somehow find a way to win the WS. Every. Single. Time.

Now, it's obviously a risk, and you could turn out like Oakland last year (not that I would suggest we do anything like they did...), but I think you're missing the point.

It's the Oakland example (and countless others) that make "Flags Fly Forever" as a justification for a massive overpay a bad idea. Mid-season trades should be made with the same type of decision making process as any other trades. The only thing you're really changing are the variables (the value of a win, the breadth of the market, leverage, payroll room, etc). Get caught up in the heat of a moment bidding against yourself, and you run the risk of getting Slocumb'd.

I think I speak for most fans who would want a sustained, perennial winner with a chance at the playoffs, and only if there is excess talent would you give it away for a rental, otherwise it compromises the future, which is always the focus since, flags do not fly forever, imho

In order to become a perennial winner, you first have to, ....ahem... win. The Jays franchise history without "going for it" in 92/93 are essentially the Leafs. And potentially could have suffered the same fate as the Expos

Lets focus on getting into the dance first before worrying about how expensive a honeymoon we can afford

The extremely compressed standings will make this year's trading deadline atypical. As of Friday morning, there are only two teams (Philadelphia and Milwaukee) playing below .400. There are only two other teams (Oakland and Miami) more than 5 games out of a wild card spot. This should reduce the number of teams "selling" and increase the number of potential "buyers" as teams approach the deadline. I suspect this will affect the traditional values associated with deadline deals. Competition among bidders will, I believe, drive "prices" up.

But, in baseball terms, getting to the dance is 90% of the battle and the main reason make "go for it" trades, not necessarily the potential honeymoon.

IMO, with the potential additions of Saunders and Stroman later in the season, with Travis coming back, and with the offense the way it is, the Jays don't have to give up the farm. An elite SP (Cueto) and some bullpen help (Paps) would be certainly help though.

"Perennial winner" ???

So when was the last time we made the playoffs?

But, hey... we kept those prospects!

If you don't get on the dance floor, you can't dance.

That being said, I have read that it is a seller's market. If it takes Hoffman to get Papelbon, I would tell the Phillies to forget it.

But, hey... we kept those prospects!

No we didn't. Starting with the Miami trade I count 18 prospects traded to strengthen the big league team. 9 of those are in MLB, 7 still in the minors, 1 (Wojo) up and down plus the suspended Rollins who had made the majors.

Also given up the #16 pick this year for Martin.

For those who were upset about the 8-man bullpen: the Jays have just opened up a spot on the 40-man roster (by trading Ronald Torreyes to the Dodgers for cash) and Shi Davidi is reporting that this is probably in preparation for promoting Santiago or Diaz, who will need a spot on the 40-man roster.  So, as expected, the 8-man bullpen is very temporary.  Schultz or Tepera will likely be demoted to make room for Santiago or Diaz, probably in the next couple of days.

Shi Davidi reports on Twitter that Torreyes has been sold to the Dodgers, which creates an opening on the 40 man for a back-up infielder. 

I think the Jays have sold more players for cash this year than during AA's entire tenure combined - I wonder if it's significant enough cash to matter - Also, the Dodgers just buy everything.

Steve Tolleson played for Dunedin yesterday. He could be the new backup infielder by Monday.

"No we didn't. Starting with the Miami trade I count 18 prospects traded to strengthen the big league team"

Exactly! We've done the whole trading prospects for proven stars. It hasn't gotten us to the dance, even when we were favored to make it to the dance. Point is you can't always be mortgaging the future for that window of opportunity, need to have balance and be selective. Who wouldn't want a do over on the Dickey trade now? Either Syndergaard helps us in the rotation, bullpen or as a trade chip to help us land that starter.

If we're trading prospects for that top shelf starter, sure. But if its for Papelbon, I'd pass.

How many players have the Blue Jays sold to the Dodgers alone this season?

I would not trade any significant prospect for Papelbon and only a B+ for Clippard. I would, however, make a significant offer for Chapman if he becomes available. I should note as well that the Cardinals have done very well by promoting their own. Let's take a longer look at Copeland and if he can fill the #5 role, move Estrada to pen.

Who's a B+ prospect?  Hoffman? Pompey? Norris? Urena? Alford? Everyone has their own system, but usually a B+ prospect is the 2nd or 3rd best prospect in an organization.

Steve Tolleson played for Dunedin yesterday. He could be the new backup infielder by Monday.

Most likely. Heard anything about Travis?

heard travis was taking BP.

Pompey hit his 2nd homer in the Eastern League tonight.  He has 4 XBH in 23 PAs there, and seems to have shaken things off. 

Urena went yard tonight as well. .

Pompey hits a 2nd homer as part of a 3-5 night.

Chase de Jong vs Quad Cities 7 IP, 4 H, 2 BB, 10K.