Is there a mandatory time frame before his name goes up on the "Level of Excellence"? The Jays aren't going to make him wait until he retires are they?

heh. classic post, brumfield.

So true. Brumfield, you truly know how to finger the pulse of the board!

But he was doing better against RHP this year!!

Classic troll job *gives standing O*

I'm going on a Valencia orange hunger strike until the Jays reacquire him.

You know, this is what gets organizations into trouble, mocking the questioning of a bad decision on the backs of small sample size performance. To say of course we were smart to DFA him because we won 11 in a row is weird thinking. Strange group you have here.

"You know, this is what gets organizations into trouble, mocking the questioning of a bad decision on the backs of small sample size performance"

How does this post get any organization in trouble? And which organization exactly? The Jays? Batters Box? The Danny Valencia Fan Club?

Avoiding this kind of post is exactly what has kept this site the way it is for years. Sorry but the whole post is way offside. Different opinions is one thing mockery another.

" Strange group you have here. "

Strange post in my mind. All this thread was commenting on was the unnecessary moaning about the loss of a utility player. Yes, Danny Valencia was a good utility player but where was he going to get at bats ? John Gibbons wants better defence in the outfield on a daily basis with Ben Revere, Josh Donaldson is going to play nearly every day, especially with so many off days coming up, and we have 3 players to fill the first base and DH position. This is a democracy and everyone can say what they want, but maybe,based on the team we have watched the past two weeks, Alex Anthopoulos and John Gibbons do actually know what they're doing. Maybe it is a small sample size, but I'll bet my bottom dollar that this team will win a lot more games over the next 2 months, and they'll do it without Danny Valencia, like it or lump it.

Island boy,

You seem to think that no one will ever get injured, no one will ever need a day off and you will never want to have a lefty killer to pinch hit for Goins, and you will never face another left handed starter. If all those things are true the indeed Valencia would have been completely superfluous.

"If all those things are true the indeed Valencia would have been completely superfluous."

You seem to think that no starting pitcher ever has a bad start and can't get out of the 2nd, none of the top 4 relievers will ever get burned throwing 30 pitches the night before, you will never want to have to have the best split/matchup advantage in a close game, you never have to throw an arm out there in a blowout to soak up innings, and you will never play an extra inning game.   If all those things are true then indeed the 8th (and 7th, and 6th, and probably 5th) reliever is completely superfluous.

But but but, the starters HAVE not had a bad start in 11 games, the top relievers HAVE had manageable workloads in the same 11 games, all relievers HAVE pitched well in almost every game situation in the same 11 games, there HAVE not been innings to soak up (in blowout losses), and there HAVE only been 3 extra innings to pitch on top of the 99 regular ones.

See see see, results prove the wrong decision on the 25th roster spot was made, and clearly this will be the end of times because nothing can ever be done ever again forevermore to rectify the perceived injustice that was done to Valencia and His Fan Club, especially not from the such unsavoury avenues like Buffalo, waivers, August trades, or Act of God(damit I Love It).

Just enjoy it folks, it's been a long time coming.

I'm aware of all these things Robert, but so are AA and Gibbons. As far as I know, Valencia only played third and first well. If Donaldson got hurt, I assume Matt Hague would be called up and we already have Cliff Pennington on the club. We also have three first basemen as it is, so he wouldn't be needed there. If Goins needed to be pinch hit for, one of Smoak,Colabello or Encarnacion is likely available from the bench, all of whom can bat righthanded. ( I mean one of them wouldn't be in the starting lineup. ) Look, I get the angst of giving up a decent utility player in Valencia for nothing, and it bothered me some to see blue chip prospects like Norris and Hoffman get traded. However, I recently saw a list of where the Jays were situated in the standings at this date for the past twenty years and there were a lot of 4th and 5th places on it. The recent additions have helped transformed the Jays into a strong, confident team, they are in first place playing in front of huge crowds with an electric atmosphere. Yes, some of the recent moves may bite us in the butt in the future, but the present sure beats the mediocrity of the past, so why not shelve the criticism and just enjoy the ride ?

No reason for an 8 man pen if most of your starters are expected to go 6 plus innings. A bad start is exactly why your 7th man is a guy capable of giving you 5 plus innings, eg as Doubront did for the A's. And if you have a few games in a row where the pen gets used up, you farm out the back end of your bullpen and call up a couple of guys from Buffalo.

I think most will agree that a rotation of Price, Dickey, Buehrle, Estrada and Hutchison are capable of averaging 6 innings per rotation without much difficulty. And that's not even factoring in all the off days in August.

Then we can get into the postseason issue, wherein your 5th starter goes to the pen and thus you need to add a position player to avoid having a 9 man pen.

Bottom line, 8 man pen is stupid.

If the argument is made 8 relievers are too many now, I don't think there will be much if any disagreement here. At the time it was defensible, although not to those who think even 7 are too many, a belief no team seems to agree with.

We had Kawasaki and now Pennington to back up. Colabello, who sits now when Eddie plays is the lefty masher. Days off? There's 3 coming up and September is just around the corner.

And finally, he's gone. To many here the incessant wailing and gnashing of teeth is a bit much for a player who does have some skills, but provided 0.7 WAR value this year for the Jays by hitting as well as he ever has in the majors.

Island boy,

I was there today, yes it was electric. Yes I soaked up the atmosphere. Being old enough to remember the glory days, this is what they felt like. Except more so because then, we weren't coming off a 21 season fast.

But that does not change the logic if the decision one iota. Pennington wasn't with the team then, and he costs way more than Kawasaki, and also cost us a prospect who I believe made Sickels top 20 preseason Jays prospect list.

And given Edwin starts the game, Valencia was the go to pinch hitter against lefties. Do you think Andrew Miller is going to be brought in to face Goins this season? Valencia would have been the logical pinch hitter, with Pennington or Kawasaki as the case may be being the defensive sub.

If it's my team we have an 11 man pitching staff with Kawasaki, Carrera, Valencia and Pennington right now. And I'm pretty sure my team beats the current team handily if we play enough games.

Sorry Kawasaki would obviously stay in aaa. Cola bello and Navarro would be the other bench players.

If everyone agrees that cutting Valencia was a bad move, I'll happily end it there.

Valencia had appeared in just 58 games this year. This despite being on the roster every single game.  I suspect his 93 OPS+ lifetime before this season had a lot to do with the decision..  Sure he was hitting a lot better this year but his 1545 PA pre 2015 vs 199 as a Jay this year I'd say are more telling.  Defensively I shuddered anytime a ball was hit to him no matter the position.  When Gibbons decided to put Martin at 2B instead of Valencia I think the writting was on the wall.  A backup needs to be able to play somewhere and ideally a lot of somewheres.  Pennington really replaced him on the roster in the end.  A switch hitter who can play SS/3B/2B/LF but with an 83 OPS+ lifetime.  His Rdrs (defensive stat from BR) is positive in his career at all positions vs Valencia being negative at most.

The Jays of 2015 have offense up the wazoo.  Only 1 team is within 100 runs scored of the Jays - the Yankees who are 73 behind.  That is crazy.  Clearly defense and pitching are the only areas this team needs to build on and Valencia doesn't help in either.  Thus why he is no longer here.

Northey,

Again sidestepping the main issue. Why not just demote a reliever for a few weeks? You don't get rid of a player who has limitations if you have the roster space to carry him.

And please remind me what position you are COMFORTABLE seeing Collabello play other than DH. Because I sure don't see one.

And again, this absurd notion that we can have enough hitting or enough hitting against left handers. I agree that defense is crucial and I love Smoak. That is why a deep bench, with defensive and offensive specialists ready to be deployed is a very good thing. That is why an 8 man pen is stupidity - precisely because it limits the development of a multifaceted bench.

Being completely honest, I'd like someone to count up all the non mop up innings pitched by the 8th reliever on any team in mlb this season. Please, let's really see how valuable that 8th man is.

Of topic,

Greg Holland imploded tonight and the Jays are now only 5 games behind AL playoff pole position.

For what it's worth, I agree entirely with Robert. The DFA seems a pointless waste of a potentially useful asset; if nothing else they certainly didn't need an 8 man pen at that point in time, so they could have sent a reliever down while reserving the right to DFA Valencia in due course if the bullpen burnt itself out on short starts or long extra inning games. Given that we had to endure the agonies of Jeremy Jeffress and Esmil Rogers, among others, simply because they were out of options and we didn't want to give them away for free, it seems odd to forfeit a complementary piece for the sake of not having to send Bo Schultz or Aaron Loup on a bus for ten days.

"The DFA seems a pointless waste of a potentially useful asset"

Precisely. Unfortuately it seems there's no room for nuance here on the Box anymore. We can't point out that it was a waste, however small, without being accused of thinking that Valencia would have been the World Series MVP.

"....there's no room for nuance here on the Box anymore....."

Was there a Golden Age of nuanced intellectual debate in the past, where fans discussed baseball without any sweeping generalizations about the stupidity of various managers, general managers, teams and fans?

If so, I unfortunately missed it.

The Box remains the best Jays site I know of, and it's not close. But it appears you've been around since March 2006, so yes, you missed the best of the Box. Back when Coach and Jordan and Craig B and Robert Dudek and Dave Till were churning out real content, those were the days.

To be fair, there's lots of great content these days too.  Very good analysis of the statistics by people such as Mike, John, uglyone, hypobole, 92-93, Chuck, yourself and many others.  The prospect reports and prospect analyses are great too.  Maybe it was better pre-2006 but it's still excellent.

The Box remains the best Jays site I know of, and it's not close

Your use of the term "real content" for the pre-2006 Box made me wonder if you were suggesting that there isn't as much "real content" these days.  If so, I'd disagree.

Agree to disagree. While granting that some people may get a lot more out of the daily MLUs than I do. (No disrespect to those writing them. I was once one of you.)

Why don't I weigh in on Valencia and then we can all close the book on it?

Always felt there was another shoe to drop with the DFA, but nothing did. So I'd agree it was a bit of a waste. I'm not sure what AA was thinking at the time, but I'm confident the decision was well-reasoned (or maybe just reasoned).

I will say this: on this roster, as currently constructed, 8th reliever versus 4th bench bat is largely moot. WAY to much ink being spilled (spilt?).

I don't know if it's reality for the Box or not, but a lot of very good blogs are started by university students with lots of time on their hands (trying to do anything but study). These blogs grow up and the writers get spouses, kids, jobs, etc. Content then suffers.

The content on here is good, and the writers are excellent, but it is possible that they may have very busy lives. It strikes me that only #2 may be a wayward soul, wandering around aimlessly snapping pictures of anyone he comes across in stirrups (j/k)*.

Maybe its my old age, but i share a preference to the Box of 8 years ago, but this doesn't mean that it isn't still one of my favourite magazines to read every day.

*#2's photojournalism may be the posterchild of this era of the Box. Truly excellent work.

You are correct AYJ that people move on and life intervenes. But the entire landscape of "Blogs" has changed in the last ten years. Most Blue Jays blogs are affiliated with a bigger service, or a media aggreggator, and they feature ads. They have to publish a certain amount of new content per day to pay the bills.

Batters Box has never had an ad leaving it as a labour of love. Also the major media sites now "blog" if not in name at least in practical terms. News is instant, twitter has taken away some of the immediacy. You don't need to come here for the news, its on twitter.

I could go on and on but the world is a different place than 10 years ago, as is the internet and as is how people follow and discuss their favourite team.

Gerry, you're right about the fast-shifting nature of blogging and baseball analysis on the web these days, and of course Batters Box suffers somewhat from a lack of a commercial sponsor or a big media partner.  But the key difference here is the excellent signal-to-noise ratio among the commentators and roster members.  While there might be more frequent fresh daily content on the bigger commercial blogs, the quality of the comments on those sites is not as good as here.  On those sites, you have to wade through hundreds of trivial or superficial comments (often wrong or annoying or irrelevant) in order to find the intelligent comments.  Here the ratio is the reverse.  A much higher percentage of the comments on Batters Box are insightful and worth reading, because they provide data and evidence to support their arguments.  In that sense, it's a true collective of the voluntary contributors, pooling their wisdom for the common benefit.

The Box is easily the best site for me, and I also think we should be able to call a mistake a mistake without being castigated for not enjoying the winning streak. I'm LOVING the winning streak, but the Valencia DFA was a bad move. It won't cost them the World Series, but it's a bad move. That's all.

"Unfortuately it seems there's no room for nuance here on the Box anymore. We can't point out that it was a waste, however small, without being accused of thinking that Valencia would have been the World Series MVP."

Conversely, the perpetrators of these mistakes are commonly labelled stupid, idiotic, incompetent etc. and the defenders of these poor, unfortunate souls branded apologists. That unrefined brush paints people on both sides of the argument. Sadly, this lack of nuance may in part be a result in the preponderance of public information available to the general public. This seems to, on occasion, impart a feeling of expertise where none is warranted, leading to many a declaration of fact, based solely on what The Book or Fangraphs may indicate to have been ideal. Perhaps a friendly reminder of the ground rules for the site would be beneficial in framing future discussions. After all, if there is one lesson that baseball has consistently taught us over the course of its history, it is that you (the royal you) know nothing!

"Conversely, the perpetrators of these mistakes are commonly labelled stupid, idiotic, incompetent"

I'm not entirely clear if you're saying that people are calling Blue Jays management "stupid, idiotic, incompetent", or if they're directing those words at other posters. But either way.. What? You've seen those terms here at Batter's Box, directed at people? I have not.

Valencia DFA'ed is a bad move.

Would I say that there are duplicates on various players of Valencia's utility on Jays ? He not being a 2B is unfortunate.
Is the DFA transaction appropriate ? Could Valencia be traded for Lawrie ? With Travis out, Lawrie can man 2B with Goins or be kept in Buffalo; Letting a Canadian around a elite group of player would help his development.

"...a feeling of expertise where none is warranted....  After all, if there is one lesson that baseball has consistently taught us over the course of its history, it is that you (the royal you) know nothing!...."

Amen. 

"I'm not entirely clear if you're saying that people are calling Blue Jays management "stupid, idiotic, incompetent", or if they're directing those words at other posters. But either way.. What?"

If you would like to split semantic hairs over whether statements like "an 8 man pen is stupidity" actually imply the ones responsible for that decision are stupid or rather they are just being insulted for their stupidity in that instance that is fine, but statements like this have become commonplace. Likewise, if I state your notion is absurd, I may not imply that ergo, you are an absurd person but I am nonetheless insulting your position.

Just to be clear, I am certainly not implying that I am beyond reproach in this matter. Sarcasm, that tired device, is no stranger to posts I have been responsible for in the past.

I found the post to be hilarious, I think AA made a mistake DFA'ing Valencia, BUT I don't think it's a huge issue and would like Carrera or Pompey up to rectify the situation.

For the record, I don't think John Gibbons is "stupid, ignorant or incompetent".  In a fit of temper, I might have uttered those words in relation to Jimy Williams, but Gibbons is at least as far from Williams as he is from Earl Weaver on the other side.  Gibbons has some preferences in relation to the bullpen that I disagree with, and as a result, I'm not crazy about him as a Manager.  A couple of young unheralded players have taken a step forward this year, and you do have to give him a piece of the credit for that.

I don't know anyone who thinks Alex Anthopoulos is "stupid, ignorant or incompetent".  The Valencia move was unusual and surprising given in particular the season he was having.  I thought at the time that it was a move aimed at providing Gibbons with the team (including the bullpen) that he wanted. 

Now, I do believe David Price is on the mound today.  The Ex doesn't open for another week but there is a carnival atmosphere by the lake...

It's interesting how much of our post-trade deadline success has been a result of pitching, rather than hitting.  Mark Lowe had a dreadful debut which cost us our only August loss, but all the remaining relief outings this month - 21 outings spread between 8 relievers - have yielded exactly one Aaron Sanchez ER.    The starters have been good, but it's really been the middle of the lineup - Donaldson, Bautista, EE and Cola (and Ryan Goins, strangely) have been raking, but the rest of the lineup, including Tulo, is scuffling - and the pen fueling this winning streak.

I certainly like our chances with Price on the mound tonight - bigbluemachine! 

Oh no. The Jays dropped Joba Chamberlain! He could have been the missing piece to winning the world series!

Personally, for a bench, I would like it used as little as possible. Except for the pitcher and catcher, I would rather see my the top players everyday. Come on. This is baseball, not football. And any player who wants a day off, I don't want on my team. Of course there are nagging injuries (like EE's finger), and you need depth because of that. But if one of your star players goes down, the team is in trouble. The backup player is just that ....a backup.

I liked in the 90's where Cito would just pencil in the same people,everyday.... "Let's see, today we will have Devo lead off, Alomar second, etc etc. " Ideally, the bench players never have to play.

Where the bullpen has a lot more utility.

Isn't there fine print in the ground rules cover the Jimy Exception?

I found the post to be hilarious, I think AA made a mistake DFA'ing Valencia, BUT I don't think it's a huge issue and would like Carrera or Pompey up to rectify the situation.

That about sums up my thoughts, as well, including the hilarity of the original post.

Back when Coach and Jordan and Craig B and Robert Dudek and Dave Till were churning out real content, those were the days.

Nurse, pass me my dentures! I feel an urge to reminisce! :-)

Valencia's primary role on the team last year was to be the backup third baseman when Lawrie got hurt - this year, the Jays don't need one of those, because Donaldson is a machine. His secondary role was to serve as a spare righthanded bat on the bench in case Gibbons wanted to pinch-hit for Goins, and Colabello has that niche filled. So Valencia isn't a great fit for this roster.

I still believe that the reason that the Jays are keeping all those relievers around is to handle extra innings if they come up. If a hitter gets injured, Pennington or somebody can fill in for the rest of the game, and the Jays can then summon somebody from Buffalo. If a game goes 16 innings - as happened to the Yankees this week - the extra relievers can deal with it.

All this thread was commenting on was the unnecessary moaning about the loss of a utility player.

But it's all unnecessary. We're chatting about baseball, not organizing a plan to fight world hunger. What you or I think about DFA'ing Danny Valencia or trading for David Price has no impact on anything.

As a point of comparison, just look at the time and energy spent on the minor league threads. How many of those prospects and draftees will get anywhere close to Danny Valencia's career?

But sometimes it's fun to talk about the GCL or roster construction. As long as people manage some diplomacy, or simply steer clear of the conversations they don't find appealing, everything's cool.

Was there a Golden Age of nuanced intellectual debate in the past, where fans discussed baseball without any sweeping generalizations about the stupidity of various managers, general managers, teams and fans?

It was circa 1995 and it was called 'fastball.com', CF. On a daily basis Micheal #1 Jaysfan would lead the board in a poised intellectual discussion, where nuance, irony, metaphor and subtlety were standard literary devices.

Man, this thread is bringing back some memories.

Anyway, Jose Reyes just cleared waivers for the Rox (further cementing the Tulo trade as a firing offense for their GM).

Perhaps Joey Bats can bring him in as cheerleader and funnel his Booster Juice endorsement fee to pay his remaining $60 million or so? On a more serious note, it would be compelling if the Yankees picked Reyes (and his salary) up, as is rumoured.

I'm not going to pretend that I've read every single post discussing the pros and cons of the Valencia DFA, simply because I don't really think it's significant enough to warrant the time to do so. So I apologize if someone has pointed out this possibility.

Could Valencia have gone to AA (or Gibbons) and made a case for more playing time? I know there aren't any reports of that kind of thing in the press, otherwise the whole discussion would be unneccessary. But it could be an explanation...his feeling underutilized and the FO deciding to accomodate him in the best way they could.

For what it's worth, given the info that we do have, it was a head-scratcher of a move. I was impressed with Valencia last year, I felt he contributed a lot relative to his limited role, but I don't think his absence is likely to make an impact. It's not like he was the designated defensive replacement for Bill Buckner or something.

Ok. Everyone. I hope at 7pm EST, we can drop this Valencia stuff and focus on the Yankees.

It is so exciting to
1. To care about baseball in August
2. Have a good team once again
3. To see the Skydome full and people caring about baseball (it is much more interesting than watching the three stooges debate)

where nuance, irony, metaphor and subtlety were standard literary devices.

Ah the golden days.  Kids could be kids, and baseball fandom was a W.P. Kinsella-esque romp through halcyon fields of wheat gentling swaying in a warm summer breeze. 

*cough*, sorry, had to get that out of my system.  Nothing makes old guys sound like, uhhh, a bunch of old guys, than a 'good old days comment' ;)

okay, my attempt at irony and nuance is complete, and clearly I never managed the simile. 

But in the spirit of Lylemcr's request, I hereby swear to never mention the name 'Danny Valencia' again, after 7pm today.  Do we have a new 'he who shall not be named'?  

Definitely not. The only thing lost in this whole situation is Danny Valencia. This comes nowhere close to Loaiza-for-Young in the annals of bad Jays moves.

James W, my point is not that Danny Valencia (I still have 4 hours + to use that name) is the equivalent of Michael Young.

My point is that the paroxysms of teeth-gnashing on the box inspired by the mention of either name are equivalent. 

Okay. I will abide by the no more Valencia talk after 7 pm, as long as everyone else does.

Saying an 8 man pen is stupidity is not at all the same as saying someone is stupid. Yesterday, I left a heat element on in my house for several hours. Nothing bad happened, but it was stupid of me to do so. But that does not mean I consider myself to be stupid.

What I hate most about some of these discussions is two things. The first is the resort to the argument of the type AA knows what he's doing or a Gibbons wanted. This is a pure appeal to authority and has no place in logical argumentation. The second is the seeking of an explanation as to why AA or Gibbons did something as if it helps us evaluate the decision It would be one thing if we knew exactly what the motives were, it is quite another to speculate.

The only way to assess any decision is to gather all the available information and ask everyone to analyse it without reference to the actual decision made. Then we could have a discussion about the merits.

Those supporting Valencias dfa talk about Valencia, but rarely about the 8 man pen. The salient fact is that Valencia was thrown away because someone wanted an 8 man pen.

Danny Valencia = Michael Young?

Holy... I didn't know that! We shouldn't of DFA'd him! We could have traded him to get something good. Maybe we could have packaged him with Carrera to the Mariners to get Felix!

I am 100% sure AA shopped him around to see if he could get something for him and it was not Felix.

And if he does turn into Michael YOung. Good for him. He wasn't going to do it with the current depth of the Blue Jays right now.

The part that people forget of the Blue Jays getting Bautista from the Pirates was that the Pirates did not know how to get the best out of him. It could be because of coaching, personalities, team depth, etc. If the Pirates did keep him, he probably would just turned out to be a marginal player. YOu just don't know. Hind sight is 20/20.

I view Valencia the same way. Right now, the organization likes Donaldson, EE, Cola and Smoak more. He might turn out to be a super stud, but it probably was not as a Jay.

ps. I also hear he is a club house cancer. I thought the Jays were trying to get rid of that (ie. Lind)

Esteban Loaiza was known for years around here as either "E---L--" or "He who shall not be named".  On the gnash-o-meter, l'affaire Valencia will probably end up being about a 2.5 compared with an 8.5 or 9 for the Loaiza-Young trade. 

"ps. I also hear he is a club house cancer."

Where do you hear this?

Do you want the Gladys Knight and the Pips version or the Marvin Gaye version of the answer to that question, Jonny?

While I don't agree with Valencia being DFA'ed when there were other bit/similar players that could've been optioned, I had to chuckled when I saw a thread dedicated to this very topic. Of course it could've also been seen as being analogous to throwing fuel onto an already simmering fire...but I digress.

I think we've beaten this dead horse quite a bit past its due date. There are members who feel losing a player that produced value during the year then being lost for nothing, when it could've been easily avoided will see it as head-scratcher at the very least. Other members will believe that others are making a mountain out of a mole hill. It's probably high time to simply say we agree to disagree and move on.

This site was always dedicated to making mountains out of molehills. How else would the minor league coverage here be second to none for well over a decade now.

Tempting to ask for a 'no complaints about Jay moves in the 8 hours after a victory' but I know it would never work.  I doubt we'd have seen 8 hours go by after either World Series victory without someone complaining about Gaston (for example - how could he have let the Jays season almost come down to Alfredo Griffin coming up with the winning run on base).  Second guessing is easy.  I find it more fun trying to see what are the consequences of a series of actions.

So without an 8 man bullpen what are the pluses/minuses?

• 8 man pen - can ensure no reliever is overused, risk of underuse though
  
• 7 man pen - have more pinch hit/run/defense options

So the question becomes which is a bigger risk.  If you overuse a pen then all relievers drop in quality, which can lead to overuse of the rotation and eventual ineffectiveness there too.

If you have a short bench then you might play your everyday guys too much or get caught with an unfavorable match up late in the game (letting Goins hit in the 9th or later for example).

In August...

• Osuna: 6 games, never 2 days in a row, no more than 2 days off in a row 6 1/3 IP 1 R/ER, 1 BB, 4 SO, 1 HR (in first game of month)
• Sanchez: 6 games, 5 2/3 IP, 1 H, 1 BB, 5 SO, 1 R/ER, Once back to back the run was off a HBP
• Hawkins: 4 games, 3 2/3 IP, 3 H, 3 SO, always a day off between games
• Lowe: 4 games, 3 1/3 IP, 4 H, 2 SO, 1 HR, 3 R/ER, back to back once his bad game was his first here (as we all recall)
• Hendricks: 3 games, 3 innings, 2 hits, 5 K's
• Cecil: 2 games, 2 innings, 1 hit, 2 K's.
• Schultz: 2 games, 3 IP, 1 H, 1BB, 1 SO
• Loup: 1 game, 1 IP, 2 K's, 1 hit

Clearly Gibbons favorites are the kids and Hawkins.  Loup's one game was a 10-3 victory pitching the last inning.  So an inning even I might have been able to get the Jays through with my 50 MPH fastball.  Right now with the rotation hot the pen gets all the rest it needs.  But would anyone have predicted that going into the Yankee series last week?  I can see value in having that full pen right now. 

As to rest, I suspect Gibbons likes giving full days off, not partial.  Pennington should cover that for 3B/SS/2B, a real outfielder would be nice instead of Colabello but who would you call up?  Pompey needs regular AB's right now, Carrera would have to be the choice and his defense isn't much.  Best to let Pillar push through the month then get days off in September I'd figure.

Interesting article on the Blue Jays surge from a financial standpoint.
http://business.financialpost.com/news/retail-marketing/how-rogers-communications-inc-is-getting-bang-for-its-buck-as-blue-jays-go-from-snooze-to-sensation

Gibbons seems to have settled into a catching rotation which involves Martin catching Dickey, Hutchison and Price, and Navarro catching Buehrle and Estrada.  This means that Martin very rarely gets a day game after a night game, and is on pace for just under 120 games caught.  That is a good number, given that Dickey is a little more work for him and given that Navarro is a far better than average back-up catcher. It's a nice adaptation by Gibbons to a challenging situation.

One of my long-standing theories is that defence has a synergistic effect on pitching.  You might find some evidence supporting that theory in the recent performance of the club.  There have been four defensive improvements recently, in left-field (from terrible to above average), at shortstop (from below average to above average), at second base (from good to excellent) and at first base (from below average to above average).  The cumulative defensive improvement is very significant and the pitching has improved even in the "fielding independent" aspects.  What seems to have occurred is that as the defence improves, the BABIP naturally goes down (it is .211 for August).  It seems to lead to a lower K rate, a lower W rate and a lower HR rate as the pitchers are somewhat more willing to let the fielders do their thing. 

Spoken like a true James Shields fantasy owner.

Let's assume that a full workload is 6 games in 13 days. Let's further assume that a 7 man pen averages an inning per appearance. So that is 42 relief innings in 13 days, with days off that is roughly 4 innings per game for the pen. Do you think it likely that the starting rotation as of August 1 average less than 6 innings per start?

I do not, and so a 7 man pen doesn't come close to exhausting the work limit. Therefore, I conclude that there is strong evidence to suppose that an 8 man pen does not reduce the overwork risk of the relievers at all and therefore there is nothing to trade off by going with a seven man.

Additionally, many teams have been well known to keep a couple of relief ready pitchers in aaa, effectively making it a virtual 9 man pen even though there are only 7 on the major league roster.

"...an 8 man pen does not reduce the overwork risk of the relievers at all..."

The purpose of an 8-man pen is not to reduce the overwork risk of the relievers.

Very cryptic remark, china fan.

That is an interesting article, MatO.  It does tend to support the view, most enthusiastically espoused by Mike D, that it makes sense for the Jays to spend money to make money.  We will have time to go through the implications of the additional money the club has made further after the season ends. 

Ya know, this whole Valencia vs. 8 man pen discussion of the entire A's series (and today) would be moot if:

a. Loup was a righty with his ugly 5.05 ERA (79 ERA+)
and/or
b. Schultz was a lefty with his sweet 2.18 ERA (182 ERA+)

If Loup was demoted it would be Cecil and 7 righties, and that's not a good look.

So curse the roster construction and the fact that AA happened to bring in yet two more quality righties, LaTroy and Lowe.

But realize when you are cursing that the Jays are attempting to set a franchise record tonight of consecutive wins... against the hated Yankees.

As some of us have argued in the past, the purpose of the 8-man bullpen is to provide an additional match-up choice for Gibbons when he's trying to figure out the best reliever to tackle a particular 3-man or 4-man stretch of an opposition lineup in the late innings.  Like other managers, he sees each reliever as having his own unique strengths, and those strengths match up better against certain hitters than against other hitters.  So having the 8th man in the bullpen creates an extra match-up possibility, allowing more diverse options for shutting down a specific group of opposition hitters.

Other reasons for the 8-man bullpen include the risk of extra-innings and the risk of an early implosion by Hutchison or Estrada.  Both could mean a need for 5 or 6 relievers in one game.  It means you don't exhaust your whole bullpen if you have a particular game where you need a bunch of them. You still have key guys available for the next day.  It's an insurance factor.

I realize that lots of people have lots of very strong arguments against the 8-man pen, and they're all as valid as any reason that I can cite on the other side.  I just wish people wouldn't call it "stupid."  There are points on both sides of the debate.  It's a choice by the manager.  It's not a mental illness.

The 7th and 8th man of any pen are just weaker versions of the top 6 guys. Maybe you could look at how Gibbons actually uses the 7th or 8th man.

It's not a choice by the manager, the GM decides who is on the roster. The 8 man pen is stupid for any team that has a good starting rotation.

In the case of a long extra inning game, you have the guys in aaa for an immediate call up. The Yankees just went through a 16 inning game and then called up Capuano the next day, all the while maintaining a 7 man pen.

The way I see it, there are strong arguments on one side, and very flimsy ones that do not hold up to scrutiny on the other. I've not seen anyone offer a concrete instantiation of the value of the 8th man on a team that has a very good starting rotation.

FIP says our starters are 21st best in MLB.

Are you looking at July performance and including David Price?

It's not a choice by the manager, the GM decides who is on the roster.

well, it's been widely reported that AA DFAed Danny Valencia (1 hour and 15 minutes left for me to use this name) because of Gibbons' preference for an 8 man pen.  So that quote is wrong in this case.  (unless you want to be pedantic.) 

That was a disingenuous remark, since Price has replaced the jetsam and flotsam. Still don't think the rotation is as good as they've pitched lately, though not as bad as earlier this year.

Has any reporter asked Gibbons for his rationale for the 8 man pen?

The Jays, over the course of the season and despite playing more games than the average AL team, has the THIRD lowest number of relief appearances in the AL, with the Orioles and White Sox lower. That despite the terrible rotation we had for the first half of the year.

Over the last 30 days, we are tied for third lowest with the Athletics, again with the Orioles and White Sox lower.

If this team was chewing up relievers it MIGHT justify an 8th arm, but if anything this team has been on the economical side of relief pitcher use.

Hyperbole,

I was calling into question the relevance of your stat for the purpose of the dfa decision.

The jays starters' flip was 5th best in the AL in July and so far 3rd best in AL in August. It's not wise to mix in the NL teams.

I think John Northey hit the nail on the head. Good post.

That is an interesting article, MatO. It does tend to support the view, most enthusiastically espoused by Mike D, that it makes sense for the Jays to spend money to make money. We will have time to go through the implications of the additional money the club has made further after the season ends.

Actually what I found most interesting about the article was the acknowledgement that fully one-third of the advertising slots had gone unsold by contract. Someone, perhaps Chuck, mentioned in a different thread that there seems to be less self-advertising of Rogers products (Next Issue is an example). But it looks like the advertising problem is one that remains.

I remember an article a few years back when CBC pulled out of broadcasting games when they paid $150k per game and said they were losing money hand over fist due to the scarcity of TV advertising dollars. That was around the time when the team was not even bothering to broadcast 10% of its schedule.

it would be good if one of the results of the surge is that next year the broadcaster is able to sell more advertising slots.