EE's contract situation seems a bit odd to me - how many years could he possibly be asking for, as a DH with health issues and an 'old man' skill set?

Most of the fan-friendly contract scenarios I've seen floated have a three year deal with an option in mind for him, but I've always thought a four year deal works for both parties? 

For the 4th OF, Ceciliani has certainly had the best spring and his skill set fits the team needs.  This FO has shown a willingness to view minor league talent as fungible in the past (Burns and Smith exposed for the rule v) - I guess the decision comes down to how often they want to rest guys in April and how much upside they see in Lake?  I can't see Brown, Pompey or Carerra as the 4th OF at his point, and I could see the team wanting to rest Bautista and Saunders as often as possible, so maybe you do break camp with the best candidate, options be damned.

How does Ceciliani look in CF? 

At this point, Id use Sanchez as the 5th starter and if he struggles, or someone beats him out of the job, they can move him to the pen - maximize his IPs and future potential.  It's certainly the most interesting spring training battle I can recall in recent years. 

A nice 17th birthday president for Vladimir Guerrero Jr today:  he is on the Jays roster for tonight's game against the Yankees.  (He is listed as the second name on the RHH bench.  So he should get an AB or two.)

It's Vladdy's world, and we're just living in it.

That should read "birthday present", not "birthday president."

But heck, make him president too.

I listened to Ardon Zwelling and Ben Nicholson-Smith's podcast. They believe Gavin Floyd has the track on the number five starter position. They cite his starters mix of pitches and his ties to the new front office.

If that is true, and Sanchez goes to the bullpen, then you have five BP spots locked up, Storen, Osuna, Sanchez, Cecil and Chavez. It could be tough to keep Biagini under that scenario.

It could be Emilio Guerrero too.

Yes, my apologies, it does seem to be Emilio Guerrero....   Never mind.... 

Chris King was at Blue Jays minor league camp today. He was impressed with some Jays:

Jose Espada was working 89-91 in his only inning. All FB's. Moved it around the zone well and threw strikes

Hansel Rodriguez pumping easy 93-94. Filled the lower half of the zone with his heavy FB

Vlad Jr. 2-3 with 2 oppo singles and 2 RBI's. Showing some patience on some nice pitchers pitches

Yannsy Diaz has a live arm and tons of movement on his FB. Sitting 93-94 with medium effort

Wow. Kelyn Jose looks like a new pitcher. Much more clean and under control delivery. Sat 95-97 T98 with life. Sweeping SL at 82

It was supposed to be Emilio Guerrero but he has now been scratched according to Gregor Chisholm.

"EE's contract situation seems a bit odd to me - how many years could he possibly be asking for, as a DH with health issues and an 'old man' skill set?"

It depends how he views himself. If Encarnacion believes his best comparison is David Ortiz, another late blooming DH possessing an 'old man' skill set he could be asking for a lot.

our raw young slugger showing patience and dropping in oppo field rbi singles makes me happy.

Staying healthy can be a skill, but being unhealthy can also be just plain ol' misfortune. Maybe he's used up all that Misfortune(TM) for now. Fingers crossed.

It depends on the injury.  In Floyd's case, he's had TJ followed by 2 surgeries for right elbow fractures.  These are not random idiosyncratic events.  It may be that he can find some way of working through all of this, but the odds that he can give you a good season in the rotation are quite low.  While I have a lot of skepticism about Sanchez' ability to give you 32 starts of 6 innings, I do think that he has better odds than Floyd.  

There are some tough decisions, because the pitcher who I'd have been most inclined to at the outset of spring training (Chavez) has not looked as good as either Sanchez or Floyd. 

Wow. Kelyn Jose looks like a new pitcher. Much more clean and under control delivery. Sat 95-97 T98 with life. Sweeping SL at 82

Who is this kid?  not much to glean from his stats ... tall young lefty with control issues.  But that report sounds darned impressive.

Stoeten is speculating that the Jays may have offered EE a two year extension - I get the appeal of that from their POV, if true - but that seems like a borderline insulting lowball to Edwin if true. 

Hodgie, what seems like 'a lot' to you in this case?

I believe EE wants 4 years and the Jays are offering 2. Not counting this year.
It shouldn't be hard to do 4 year with some sort of buy back or 3 years with a player option.

I don't see Ortiz as a good comparison. Left bats are more valuable.

shapiro was never signing jose or edwin.

If Floyd stays healthy, then I definitely see him getting the #5 spot with Sanchez in the bullpen. A pen with Chavez and Floyd both in it does not make any sense from a roster standpoint, and at least with Sanchez you know he's going to be a pretty good short reliever. Not the ideal result for Sanchez long-term, but I guess there's always a chance they can start him in the pen and then if injuries/ineffectiveness hit any of the rotation options, they can work him into the rotation some time mid-season. Given that he has a career high 130 IP and less than 100 last season, the pen to starter transition mid-season might be best for him in 2016 from an innings standpoint. Maybe use him as a multi-inning option for the first month or two of the season. I'm always a bit skeptical of the RP to SP transition, but with Sanchez in 2016 and possibly Osuna in 2017, it is something the Jays will have to work around.

But I agree completely with the sentiment that this FO will choose Floyd, if he stays healthy. While I didn't think they would use him as a SP when he was originally signed, the fact that they have stretched him out and his velocity has stayed the same is a good sign. Milk as much value out of him as long as his arm stays in tact. Even at his age there is upside there.

"shapiro was never signing jose or edwin."


Agreed. Unless one of them (Edwin is more likely) tests the market and finds out it's not as lucrative as he originally thought and is willing to sign with the Jays for a price this FO is comfortable with, then I think it's pretty clear both are gone after the season.

This extension talk is window dressing. It always has been. The players don't benefit from signing extensions prior to testing the market, and the team doesn't benefit from signing them to market value extensions into their late-30's while they still have one more cheap year of control left for each. Play out the season and see what happens. I think I already know what will happen, but a lot will depend on things we don't know yet (ex. what will payroll be in 2017-beyond, how did JB/EE perform in 2016, etc).

I think if the Jays envision Sanchez as a starter long-term, they should seize the moment and put him in the rotation now.

Vlad Jr. 2-3 with 2 oppo singles and 2 RBI's. Showing some patience on some nice pitchers pitches

Vlad Sr: Patience, eh? You're no son of mine. (He learned to say "eh" while working in Canada.)

While I'm firmly in the Sanchez for 5th starter camp, I expect Floyd has the inside track not only because of his pedigree and prior relationship with Shapkins but also because Sanchez in the rotation to start the year will likely bring up the question of innings limit - hopefully Sanchez joins the rotation sometime this season and into the playoffs.

While Celiliani has been the best of the 4th outfielder options & looked solid on defence - the club may prefer him to play everyday in Buffalo and be first in line to replace an outfield injury rather than languish on the bench & also he has options.

If Bautista & EE wants the Jays to pay market value & that's their prerogative, then there is little incentive for the Jays to sign them now - better to play out the year because so much can happen - injuries, poor performance, etc. - also if Colabello has another solid year, his best position is DH and a reasonable & much cheaper replacement for EE.

The benefit for the players comes from the guaranteed money. They could very suffer a career ending injury or one bad enough to diminish their free agency value. The benefit for the team is that you can pay them more this year, resulting in a better deal for the remaining years.

There are a numbers of reason for the team not wanting to do it. Realistically, the Jays only need one big bat at DH/1B and extending one guy might upset the other. Also they might think Cola is good enough to cover those position for a fraction of the cost.

Guys earning a spot in the rotation so far:

SP Stroman 9.2ip, 0bb/9k, 0.72wh, 2.79era
SP Dickey 9.1ip, 1bb/2k, 0.96wh, 3.86era
SP Floyd 8.0ip, 1bb/9k, 0.75wh, 3.38era
SP Sanchez 9.0ip, 1bb/10k, 1.11wh, 2.00era
SP Hutch 11.1ip, 3bb/8k, 1.06wh, 3.97era

Guys not earning a spot so far (aka the $30m Trio):

SP Chavez 10.0ip, 5bb/5k, 1.40wh, 4.50era
SP Happ 4.2ip, 1bb/3k, 1.50wh, 1.93era
SP Estrada ---

Sanchez in the rotation to start the year will likely bring up the question of innings limit- hopefully Sanchez joins the rotation sometime this season and into the playoffs.


Unfortunately they have the same issue with Floyd. Been 4 years since he even broke 160 innings.

But i think you're right. Much as i like Sanchez in the rotation, might be safer to start him in the pen, look for multi inning opportunities and then as you say move him to SP later in the year-likely as injuries hit- so he peaks for September and hopefully the playoffs. Hate to see them blow out his arm.

One more thing about Gavin Floyd to consider that I've heard on Podcasts. Neither ligaments (Tommy John Surgery) nor elbows are soft tissue injuries, and are easier to recover from. An oblique injury, groin injuries, muscle pulls and tears, etc. (soft tissue) will almost always reoccur sometime later in a career, sometime sooner too. Ligaments and bones are more durable even after healing.

Roberto Osuna had Tommy John surgery in 2013 and only pitched 70 innings last season.  So everyone is comfortable with the decision to keep him in the bullpen this year.

Gavin Floyd had Tommy John surgery in 2013 and only pitched 20 innings last season (even if you include his minor-league games). He also had serious arm injuries in 2014 and again in 2015.  Yet many fans seem confident that he can step right into the rotation this season.   Why?  Because he was a good starter FOUR years ago?

I am baffled that so many people are so confident in Floyd's potential as a starter in 2015, when they are rightly skeptical of Osuna's potential as a starter in 2016.   (And don't tell me that it's because Floyd wants to be a starter this season, while Osuna prefers to be in the bullpen for one more season.  A baseball team doesn't allow its own players to decide where to play.)

Now, let me backpedal for a second.  If Floyd is able to pitch 6 or 7 innings per game, and if he is a stronger pitcher than Sanchez this spring, then yes, I don't mind giving him the job and seeing how long he lasts.  He's only costing $1-million this season.  There's very little risk to the Jays if he blows out his arm or falls apart.  If he's the best pitcher, give him the job.  But I find it strange that so many fans didn't want Osuna to try for the rotation this year because of his injury record and his limited innings -- yet nobody seems to be bothered by these factors for an older and possibly more fragile pitcher with a much worse injury record.

"A baseball team doesn't allow its own players to decide where to play"

Unless the player's name is Derek Jeter and the team just traded for Alex Rodriguez :)

Minor league note:

Pat Hentgen was on the Fan today with good insights into the Jay's pitchers. Check it out if you can.

On the minor league side he really liked Tom Robson who is coming back from TJ surgery.

"I don't see Ortiz as a good comparison. Left bats are more valuable.

Pourquoi?

Have you looked at Encarnacion's splits the last four seasons?

@jerjapan

I won't speculate on an exact number of years or dollars that Encarnacion's camp is requesting, but David Ortiz accumulated 18 fWAR through his age 33-39 seasons. Again, if that is the comparison that Encarnacion is drawing (I certainly would if I were his agent) your speculation can likely start there.

Top hitters, last 2yrs:

1. Trout 170wrc+
2. Harper 166
3. Goldschmidt 160
4. McCutchen 157
5. Cabrera 155
6. Bautista 154
7. Encarnacion 150
8. Rizzo 150
9. Cruz 147
10. Abreu 147


p.s. Edwin and Cabrera are the same age.

We've been through this before.  Ortiz is an outlier in major league history- one of the very few players who was a very, very good hitter after age 35 without being an All-time great (on the order of Ruth, Williams, Musial....) prior to age 35.  There are a couple of other outliers- Cruz Jr., Downing- but for the most part, players of Encarnacion's (and Bautista's) quality decline very significantly after age 35.  It is true that being a DH may help in limiting the pace of the decline.  There have not been too many DHs who were as good and consistent as Encarnacion has been between ages 29 and 33.  Even Ortiz hit a mid-career trough at age 32-33, and many of us thought that he was on an early path to retirement.  Wrong.

would have been much easier to let Bautista/Encarnacion walk if we had spent the money on the 30yr old Ace in the first palce.

Ugly, I'm guessing you saw this but if not, more fodder for your frustration!

http://bluejayhunter.com/2016/03/kaplan-david-price-wouldve-taken-less-to-stay-in-toronto.html

I have to concur with Mike Green - Ortiz is a comp for EE only if EE's agent is being intentionally delusional - and that is literally no knock on EE - Ortiz is utterly unique. 

earlier in the offseason I repeated Tammy Rainey's guesstimate of a fair deal for Edwin - 3 years, $45 million with a fourth year at $15 million with a $5 million buyout.  Is that starting to look too low now?

Cruz signed for 4yrs x $14m two years ago and he was coming off a number of years nowhere remotely close to as good as Edwin's recent history.

Agreed with Mike Green. In the post-PED era, players are not aging the way they used to. Ortiz is not only an exception to normal aging curves, but he's also someone who has been linked to PED use in the past. The risk associated with hitters in their late-30's is real, and the Jays are perfectly reasonable in their reluctance to spend market value on players in that age bracket when they don't have to.

Extending Encarnacion means you're getting him from ages 34-37 (if it's a four year deal), not ages 29-33. What he did from 2012-16 will be irrelevant in 2017-beyond. The Jays would be paying a lot more to get a lot less. Same applies to Bautista. The Jays are doing the right thing by going for it in 2016 while being prepared to move on in 2017. It may not be popular, but it's logical.

Although, it will be a long winter next year if/when both leave. The David Price horse is so bloodied right now that it's barely recognizable (still being mentioned in March thanks to the above post). I can't imagine the bellyaching when guys who actually spent more than 2 months on the roster leave for other teams.

probably the 3 most relevant comps came from last offseason

H.Ramirez (31): 5yrs x $22.0m
V.Martinez (36): 4yrs x $17.0m
N.Cruz (34): 4yrs x $14.0m

of course, Edwin and Jose are far better hitters than any of those guys.

"The David Price horse is so bloodied right now that it's barely recognizable (still being mentioned in March thanks to the above post). I can't imagine the bellyaching when guys who actually spent more than 2 months on the roster leave for other teams."

I think you'll find that most are much more understanding of letting go of old DHs than they are of not bothering to bid on a 30yr old perennial Cy contender.

And they'd be even more understanding if the team hadn't already cheaped out the prior offseason.

Not too mention the "casual fan" has (from what I have heard) reacted negatively to the "demands" of JB & EE. I think there's a chance that the fans take the side of the Jays on this one.

Floyd is on a short contract. He wants to start. He's trying to resurrect his career and he's got lots of money in the bank no matter what.

Sanchez is under team control for several years. He doesn't want to start. He's career hasn't taken off yet and he wants to secure his future before his arm falls off.

Quite different scenarios.

I don't think neither Floyd nor Sanchez can last in the rotation all year. I expect both to get a shot at some point during the year.

15M a year seems low for EE. I think he's worth closer to 20M.

Yes, Bautista coming out with his demands publicly (especially the way he did it) has definitely made moving on from him a lot easier for the FO from an optics standpoint. If Bautista expressed a desire to stay, and ultimately kept his demands behind closed doors, then I think the public perception to not extending him would have been a lot different. Jose did the Jays/Rogers a few favor there.

Guys not earning a spot so far (aka the $30m Trio):

SP Chavez 10.0ip, 5bb/5k, 1.40wh, 4.50era
SP Happ 4.2ip, 1bb/3k, 1.50wh, 1.93era
SP Estrada ---

That doesn't look that bad for Happ.
Estrada says his back is fine now.
Chavez will be making 4M, so that's that.

Everybody take a breath and relax. We get in too much of a rush in our responses to consider actually what someone is really saying. It's not always in black and white.

The Blue Jays Players, Executive and Media all say the same thing. The Jays don't need great Pitching, they just need good Pitching. Their Offense and Defense is among the very best in Baseball. The Bullpen, with Drew Storen, Roberto Osuna and Brett Cecil at the back end, barely competes with the other Teams they must play. The composition of the balance of the Bullpen will never cover an injury to one of the Big Three.

Aaron Sanchez will never finish the season in the Rotation if he starts in the Rotation. After just pitching about 105 innings in 2015, expecting Aaron to pitch 210 innings or more this year makes zero sense. At some point in time he gets shut totally down, and never pitches in the Postseason in 2016. And don't say put him in the Bullpen, because some people don't want him there at any time. Gavin Floyd has been a very good Pitcher in his career. He hasn't pitched much since his TJ surgery, so his arm has fewer miles on it. Right now he's pitching exceptionally well. It's very apparent Gavin Floyd will either break or run out of gas at some point in this season. There are only so many innings on that arm. He might not be available to relieve Sanchez when he runs out. Jesse Chavez is pitching well but not quite as good as Sanchez or Floyd are. He traditionally pitches very well in April and effectively well into June. He might be still be effective if relieving Floyd, but might not be that effective if relieving Sanchez.

I have no idea on how soon or even if Hutchison solves his problems. But until he does he's not the best option to relieve anyone. To properly stretch out Sanchez, I'd prefer he'd be a multi-inning Reliever pitching 135 - 140 innings this year. It's easier to stretch out a multi-inning Reliever to be a Starter if needed. But if that's done, he stays a Starter. The Jays are going for it this year, hopefully World Series bound. Maximizing assets will give the Jays the nest chance, that's why Floyd starts and Sanchez is in the Bullpen.

Ugly, the Martinez comp is the one that stands out the most to me.  to be fair, he did have a better season than EE did in 2014 prior to resigning with the Tigers, but it was still a big overpay at the time, even before he fell of precipitously last year.  Teams will pay more to keep a hometown hero sometimes. 

Ramirez and Cruz can still ostensibly play the field.  I think the Cruz deal is the best comp for Edwin at the moment. 

SK, that Price article is less than a week old.  It is definitely newsworthy.   Fans have every right to be frustrated about the offseason we had, regardless if whether shaptkins has us on the right path or not.   no extension for franchise heroes Joey Bats and Edwin, minimal apparent interest in signing them, no offer to the best starter we've had in years - who clearly may have wanted to stay for less, dropping to 14th in MLB salary after promises of 'if you come, we will spend', hometown boy wonder GM kicked to the curb, and the cops show up to protect the Ted Rogers statue from a rogue fan who was clearly going to throw it into the harbour. 

atkins may yet make us all forget AA, and Shapiro may be the best exec we've had since Gillick, but Rogers hired him in the summer.  What positives have they managed in the offseason?  From many a fan's POV, Rogers is currently run by Mr. Burns.  And it's not 'bellyaching' to form an emotional attachment to hometown heroes.  It may not be wise to make decisions based on this emotional resonance, but it's just as real a component of fandom as all our closet GM discussions of bWAR vs. fWAR. 

Scottt - Sanchez has stated repeatedly that he wants to start. 

Floyd is 33 with over 2000 innings in his pro career. Osuna is 21 with a little over 200 innings in his pro career. Floyd is signed to a 1/1 contract while Osuna has five years of control left. It's logical to let Floyd loose while being more cautious with Osuna. The latter presents a lot more long-term value to the organization. With Floyd, there's no guarantee his arm will even make it to April. Chances are if he blows out his arm again, he's probably done. Extracting as much value out of him in 2016 should be the goal. He's not looking to extend his career as a reliever, he wants to see what he has left as a SP, and the Jays have the open spot in the rotation to give him that chance. It's a win-win for both sides.

I'm one of Floyd's biggest supporters on this site, and even I'm not expecting anything from him. However, so far as his arm is healthy and his velocity is maintained, he should get a shot. Osuna simply can't start in 2016, at least not without a huge IP restriction, which would be pointless to do at the big league level.

"Osuna simply can't start in 2016, at least not without a huge IP restriction, which would be pointless to do at the big league level."

Why would it be pointless to do at the big league level?

Wouldn't it be pointless to waste those inning in the minors?

"Wouldn't it be pointless to waste those inning in the minors?"


Not if the big league team is trying to make the playoffs and/or has better (or at least more established) options to fill rotation spots already. I just don't see the point in having Osuna throw 80 IP as a SP in 2016 and then have to wonder how to use him for the last 3 months of the season when you can just plug guys like Floyd, Hutchison, or Chavez in that spot while keeping Osuna in a role he wants to be in. If you send him down, then at least you can manipulate his innings and rest periods so that he can last reasonably close to a full season as a SP, but that won't happen in the bigs.

In 2017 I think it would make more sense as he'll be an additional year removed from the surgery and he seems open to starting after 2016, but not now.

Shouldn't the decision be made on whether Osuna would pitch better in those innings than the alternative?

jerajapan, the Jays are projected to be one of the best teams in baseball this season. The fans really have no reason to be as negative as they have been.

"Shouldn't the decision be made on whether Osuna would pitch better in those innings than the alternative?"


Osuna in 2016 as a SP vs. Floyd/Chavez/Hutchison? Or even Sanchez? I'd lean towards the latter. Long-term obviously favors Osuna, but short-term, that's a huge transition and a lot to expect out of a 21-year old, no matter how mature he is for his age.

The Jays are going to try to win this year. I don't see how having Osuna in AAA moves them towards that.

SK, how many innings do you think Floyd can pitch this season after his 20 innings last season?

It's not just a matter of "plugging" Floyd into the rotation.  There's not much point in putting him into the rotation for a month or two, if it would then require the Jays to stretch out another pitcher to replace him in May or June.  Replacing a starter in the middle of the season can be done, but it's disruptive and time-consuming and it's not the ideal solution.

I just don't see how Floyd can pitch 180 innings this year, after the 20 innings of last year.  It makes more sense to have him as a "swing man" in the bullpen, where he can pitch a couple of innings anytime the Jays need him, plus be available for spot starts in the rotation if necessary.

"Osuna in 2016 as a SP vs. Floyd/Chavez/Hutchison? Or even Sanchez? I'd lean towards the latter."

Either way, the decision should be made based upon who is going to help the team most.

"jerajapan, the Jays are projected to be one of the best teams in baseball this season. The fans really have no reason to be as negative as they have been."

they were going to be projected as one of the best teams in baseball no matter what they did this offseason.

The fans really have no reason to be as negative as they have been.

Stupid, stupid fans.  How dare they have opinions?? 

Off topic, but this is interesting:

I haven't heard of him before, but a guy named Rob Arthur is employed as a "statistical consultant" for the Blue Jays.  He also writes for the US politics website, fivethirtyeight.com  (home of the famous Nate Silver, elections guru who always has the most accurate predictions for US elections).  In a new article today, Arthur writes about his "pilgrimage" to the latest SABR Analytics annual conference.  And he summarizes a few of the latest findings of the SABR baseball research.  It's worth reading, if only to get some insights into the kinds of data that the Jays are currently using in their work.  Here's the link:

 http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-baseballs-new-data-is-changing-sabermetrics/?ex_cid=538twitter

I'm pretty excited for this upcoming season. Should be good.

Regarding Osuna - I wanted him to move into the rotation this year but I read a piece earlier in spring training which mentioned that Osuna told the club that he didn't want to start this year because he wasn't comfortable with the innings buildup since his TJ surgery - he mentioned maybe next year with another year further away from the surgery and maybe 100 or so innings this year.

It's odd to be discussing Floyd and Osuna's scenarios as if they are any bit analogous. It's completely natural to be concerned about what starting every 5 days would do to Osuna's arm when he has never done that before, he's 21, and he's under control for another 5 seasons. It's also normal to ignore those concerns with Floyd, who has proven when healthy that he can handle a workload and has no value to the Jays beyond 2016.

I also don't see what the issue would be with starting the season with Floyd in the rotation and then making adjustments after if he isn't very good/gets injured. Isn't that the purpose of all the pitching depth? The team will have Chavez/Sanchez in the bullpen and Hutchison in AAA, and it wouldn't be the end of the world if they had to go to 9th SP for a few starts.

"I think you'll find that most are much more understanding of letting go of old DHs than they are of not bothering to bid on a 30yr old perennial Cy contender."

I haven't had one conversation in person where somebody expressed confusion as to why the Jays didn't sign a 30 year old pitcher to a record setting 7 year deal, and I talk to lots of Blue Jays fans on a daily basis who love nothing more than whining about Rogers' ownership.

I agree 92-93.

I'm thinking both Sanchez and Floyd begin the season in the rotation (with Estrada out) and then whoever pitches better stays when Estrada is back.

Osuna has said multiple times he likes pitching out of the 'pen so I'd let him keep doing what he's doing. An ace RP for 6 years has a lot of value.

Obviously an above average starter has more value but I don't think we can project that for him as a SP.

I'm pretty excited for this upcoming season. Should be good.

Me too, actually. Despite the lack of "storybook" moves by the Blue Jays this offseason, I feel the front office has done a very good job so far. I really like the Jays' chances of moving forward as an organization with these guys at the helm.

"We've been through this before. Ortiz is an outlier in major league history-....."

Of course Ortiz is an outlier, and that fact is in no way germane to the discussion. I hypothesized only that Encarnacion and/or his agent may draw parallels to Ortiz when framing contract expectations given their similar career arc to date. Realism and opening bargaining positions may not always be mutually exclusive but they are certainly strange bedfellows.

China, I don't think the organization or even Floyd himself knows how many innings he is capable of throwing in 2016. Hell, if he makes it to April in tact it would be a pleasant surprise. The reason why he'd be more logical to throw out there without an innings limit is because of his age and previous workload, and I'm willing to bet that neither party cares about the consequences. The Jays want to maximize the value on their investment, and Floyd wants to extend his career as a SP at age 33 when he doesn't have many bullets left. Obviously, coming off multiple elbow injuries it's pretty unlikely that he'll go back to being a workhorse, but at this point, you just run with him until his arm can't go anymore. With Osuna (and Sanchez), there has to be a level of caution because they are far too valuable long-term, not to mention they lack innings. If Floyd gives the Jays 10 starts before his arm falls off, then they can go to Sanchez/Chavez/Hutch. That's the beauty of depth.

"they were going to be projected as one of the best teams in baseball no matter what they did this offseason."


Of course. If the team succeeds in 2016, it will be because of AA's work, and if they fail, it will be because of Shapiro's incompetence. The narrative was written in November. The point is, the team is projected to be one of the best teams in baseball, and the front office has managed to put them in that position without hurting the farm system or long-term payroll flexibility. They didn't blow up AA's team; they recognized the roster's place on the win curve and built accordingly based on whatever money they had available. It's a certain group of fans that would rather shoehorn Price's name, or Rogers' 'cheapness', and so on into every debate rather than recognize the team's situation ($140M payroll, aging roster, middle of the pack farm system, etc) and just accept the window for what it is. If the Jays payroll was $180M and they chose to avoid Price and sign Happ/Estrada, then by all means complain about it. But that's not reality. It never was, and I'm still not sure why in mid-March we are still even bringing Price's name up. The acceptance stage has to be close by now.

"Stupid, stupid fans. How dare they have opinions??"


Are Royals fans still heartbroken that after getting to Game 7 of the World Series in 2014 that they didn't bring back James Shields to a contract the team couldn't afford, did not agree to an extension with franchise player Alex Gordon prior to him testing free agency, kept pretty much the same group together, and filled their rotation holes with depth/reclamation projects? Maybe some fans were, but they got over it, I'm sure. If the Jays play as well in 2016 as they are projected to, then they should be in good position to win the division or get one of the WC spots. After that, it's anyone's ball game as far as winning a title. If you think complaining about what they didn't do is a healthier practice, then knock yourself out. I'd be right there with you if they made moves I thought were crippling, but they played it safe in a year where they could afford to play it safe. Let's see what happens, but the negativity has been way, way overboard for a team with a roster that is pretty well built for one more serious run.

If the team succeeds in 2016, it will be because of AA's work, and if they fail, it will be because of Shapiro's incompetence.

Well, here I think we are all safe from our personal biases - if Happ, Chavez and Estrada contribute on the whole and Price isn't dearly missed, I think we can call that a win for Shaptikins.  if they blow up, that's on the new FO too.  I think our offseason was just fine really, if a bit boring to follow as a fan.  But I'd rather have a winning team than a winning offseason, so I'm reserving judgement.

As for the Royals,  man, we have to have way less budgetary concerns then they do, don't we?  Shields ain't no price, and no way is Gordon the same kind of figurehead that Joey Bats is. 

My negativity, which may or may not be that typical of the average fan, is certainly directed at ham-handed Rogers (they've had an appalling offseason PR wise) - not the team on the field or the new FO, for that matter.  Shapiro's timing was just unlucky and I hope the average fan is able to distinguish management from ownership.  Shapiro being as corporate seeming as corporate gets certainly may have lead to some people confounding the two.  And of course, the average view of Rogers from non sports fans is also pretty dim. 

Frankly, when he's not talking the corporate-speak (being an apologist for the budget, pretending the AAA rotation needs urgent attention) I like Shapiro's moves - beefing up analytics, creating a player performance department, looking to improve the spring facilities.  I even appreciated his honesty with the grass.  And I get that corporate speak is part of the job description. 

"Of course. If the team succeeds in 2016, it will be because of AA's work, and if they fail, it will be because of Shapiro's incompetence."

You say that as if it's not perfectly true and fair.

"It's a certain group of fans that would rather shoehorn Price's name, or Rogers' 'cheapness', and so on into every debate rather than recognize the team's situation ($140M payroll, aging roster, middle of the pack farm system, etc) and just accept the window for what it is. If the Jays payroll was $180M and they chose to avoid Price and sign Happ/Estrada, then by all means complain about it. But that's not reality. It never was, and I'm still not sure why in mid-March we are still even bringing Price's name up. The acceptance stage has to be close by now."

The team's window is right now.

In this window, Shapiro chose to spend $30m on a few old guys who have never held onto a permanent rotation spot in their careers instead of a perennial Cy contender. He chose to prioritize roster flexibility 5 years from now instead of our current window of contention.

And why on earth would we stop talking about this decision in the very offseason it was made? before a game has even been played? How can you even think that is reasonable? This decision will be talked about for a very long time. And it has been only a very short time so far.

I mean some people here aren't even over prospects traded 5 years ago.

"I'm pretty excited for this upcoming season. Should be good."

This season should be great.

I'm gonna enjoy every last minute of it, as chances are we won't have a team this good again in a long while.

I will be comparing what Price does with what Happ/Estrada do over the next 5 years.
I can't see why I wouldn't do that.

I agree with you Parker.

It seems like the moves management made this offseason is to help make sure the team is still competitive for the next 3-5 years, instead of going all in this season.

MLBTR is reporting that Rafael Soriano has decided to retire..

What is so annoying about the stuff with Price is that it was never going to happen. Not with AA, not with Shapiro, not with anyone. It was blindingly obvious as soon as the Jays traded for Price that he was going to be a rental and for good reason. I don't know anyone who thought for a second the Jays were going to re-sign Price. Even if he had taken less to be with the Jays, he would still have needed one of the richest and longest contracts in baseball history and for a 30 YO pitcher, that's just way too risky for any team that isn't one of the big spenders. And the posts comparing Price to his "replacements" are ridiculous because they all ignore actual contracts.

So, for example, let's take Estrada, Happ, and Dickey who are essentially replacing Price's cost this season.
2016-33.5M for 3 starters/30M for Price
2017-27.5M for two starters/30M for Price
2018-Happ-13M/Price 30M
2019-Price-31M
2020-Price-32M
2021-Price-32M
2022-Price 32M

(The Jays are spending $75M for 6 total years of legitimate starting pitchers. The Red Sox are spending $217M for 7 years of Price. Pretending that one course of action is remotely similar to the other is way off.

MLBTR is reporting that Rafael Soriano has decided to retire.

So I imagine he'll be wearing a Blue Jays hat on his HoF plaque.

Some people are speculating about Osuna being a starter in 2017, but if Storen and, potentially, Cecil leave by free agency, who is left in the bullpen ?

"You say that as if it's not perfectly true and fair."


You just said the team was going to be projected to be one of the best in baseball this season regardless of what happened in the off-season. So how would blaming Shapiro if things go poorly be consistent with that statement? The only players under contract in 2016-beyond that were moved were Hendriks and Revere. If things go sour in 2016, it won't be because of Happ, Chavez, Storen, and Floyd. Everyone else, including the coaching staff, is what he inherited or brought back from last season.

Like I said, he took the good team he inherited, and added depth + incremental wins to it without sacrificing prospects, picks, or long-term payroll flexibility. It was exactly how the off-season should have been done, and it looks more logical in hindsight given how the FA market played out. How that can be twisted into a negative is beyond me.

"And why on earth would we stop talking about this decision in the very offseason it was made? before a game has even been played? How can you even think that is reasonable? This decision will be talked about for a very long time. And it has been only a very short time so far."


Simply put, because 'they cheaped out on Price' when the guy was signed to (at the time) THE BIGGEST CONTRACT EVER GIVEN TO A STARTER over a seven year period is such a ridiculous stance to take when everyone knows the payroll limitations (whether self-inflicted or not) that the Jays have. Contrary to what you believe, teams factor future payroll into decisions, so why you keep harping on what Estrada/Happ make in 2016-17 when Rogers would have been obligated to pay Price until 2022 is strange. Also the 'AA would have signed him' stance, when he did not go over five years on anyone in six years on the job and still had to get ownership approval on any move he made, is devoid of any realism.

Price was a rental. He was never going to come back. The acceptance stage is still far away, it seems. At least trading Syndergaard is something that was entirely avoidable, so complaining about that is actually a valid criticism of the previous FO. With Price, there was no chance of it happening, so the whining comes off incredibly unnecessary.

I'm sure that St. Louis had their very own uglyone when they let Pujols walk, and I doubt that guy has much to say about it these days.

"Frankly, when he's not talking the corporate-speak (being an apologist for the budget, pretending the AAA rotation needs urgent attention) I like Shapiro's moves - beefing up analytics, creating a player performance department, looking to improve the spring facilities. I even appreciated his honesty with the grass. And I get that corporate speak is part of the job description."


Those are all reasonable stances to take. Even disagreeing with signing Happ, re-signing Estrada, and trading for Chavez are reasonable opinions. I'm not saying you have to love everything they have done. However, the 2016 roster based on how it was constructed did not require that much tinkering. They are about to enter the season with a team projected to be pretty darn good and still have all their prospects, draft picks, and financial flexibility. The window with this specific group of players was going to end after 2016 regardless of who the GM was. Even if they bring back JB and EE, it will be at a much higher cost and a much different level of projected value, so the reality is, 2016 is the year for this organization, and a retooling/restructuring of some sort will be required for 2017. They (the new FO) should be commended for recognizing the team's place on the win curve in 2016. They didn't blow everything up or try to put their own stamp on the roster. They played this off-season very well. Whether it works or not, we will know very shortly.

While Spring may mean nothing I do like the AL East standings...
Jays: 10-4 best in AL
Tampa: 7-9 4 games back
Yankees: 6-8 also 4 games back
Boston: 6-10 5 games out
Baltimore: 4-12 7 games out dead last in AL

If those mean anything at all it looks like a good summer ahead.

Players of note...
Teixeira: 136/240/182 in 22 AB's
Ortiz: 100/100/100 2 for 20 both singles
Kim: 162/220/162 big Korean signing for Baltimore
Chris Davis: 111/226/222 making me feel better about the Jays not going after him

I didn't dig into pitchers as vets tend to be fooling around with new pitches or trying to get control over their secondary ones at this point of spring. Unless someone is at an extreme for stats (2 for 20 for Ortiz) it is hard to take anything seriously. Hopeful though for the Jays when you see some of those stats.

FYI: Jays still have 8 guys with a 1000+ OPS plus Smoak just below it. Saunders still with a good line 320/393/720. In the trying to force the Jays hand category you get Andy Burns an IF hitting 368/478/789 in 19 AB's, Ceciliani an OF hitting 381/500/667 in 21 AB's. In the 'sucks to be you' category 7 guys have struck out in their only AB of the spring.

For pitching Wil Browning catches my eye with 6 K's in 2 IP, 0 walks but 2 runs given up on just 3 hits (none were home runs). 8 guys have yet to give up a run with Venditte having the most innings at 5 among that group. Rowen, Cole, and Penny have ERA's over 10 - ouch.

1. Why anyone thinks a GM who gave 5x$20m to a 32yr old catcher wouldn't be interested in landing a 30yr old ace at 7x$30m is beyond me, especially when we have heard he was already laying the groundwork for negotiations. Not to mention an ownership which 10yrs ago was willing to pay a good but non-mvp calibre CF $21m per year until age 35. 10yrs ago.

2. Shapiro added near $50m to the payroll this offseason. The payroll room was always there. He chose to spend it differently.

3. The term of the contract is meaningless in terms of future payroll crunches. If Shapiro intends to start a rebuild now, we won't be pushing any payroll parameters regardless. We don't need payroll room in 2019 if we're rebuilding.


These are all just excuses. Shapiro could easily have signed Price, and he thought it was a bad investment. Time will tell.

"You just said the team was going to be projected to be one of the best in baseball this season regardless of what happened in the off-season. So how would blaming Shapiro if things go poorly be consistent with that statement? "

If the team struggles because the likes of martin and tulo suck, AA will get blamed.

If the team struggles because their expensive rotation depth sucks, Shapiro will get blamed.

I know which I think is more likely.

"Like I said, he took the good team he inherited, and added depth + incremental wins to it without sacrificing prospects, picks, or long-term payroll flexibility."

He inherited a great team with no bad or longterm contracts, and spent a lot of money on fringe players that barely moved the needle on the team's projections.

SK please refer to Glevin on protocol to dealing with a certain poster that you keep feeding.

I will be following these boards throughout the year, ugly. I really enjoy the thoughtful analysis you bring to your posts and the way you present numbers, even though they can sometimes be skewed, but you need to stop arguing how much better this team would be if it signed David Price instead of the players they ended up signing. Besides the fact that it was over 200$ million, not 30$ Million that they needed to sign him (don't know why you keep pretending that 30$ Million was the magic number and that it wouldn't affect roster construction in future years) ...you should at least wait until the season starts to see what Price does.

I really hope for your sake that Price maintains his elite numbers, even though he's older, his numbers haven't been trending in the right direction, even though he isn't pitching in a pitchers park (TB/Detroit), even though he's pitching in the AL East against hitters like Tulo, Bautista, Edwin, Machado, Donaldson and Jones who can eat him for breakfast (please don't cherry pick numbers from at bats against Price from years ago when a guy like Machado was a different hitter or when Price was throwing 97 MPH regularly eith ease). Price won't have the pitch framing he had with Martin or the defence behind him he had here. He won't have the weaker line ups of the AL Central. He will continue to have all that mileage on his arm though. Good luck with that not blowing up Im your face in the next couple years.

breakign: Brad Penny joins Rafael Soriano in retirement.

He inherited a great team with no bad or longterm contracts, and spent a lot of money on fringe players that barely moved the needle on the team's projections.
Maybe but AA started 2015 with Sanchez and Norris in the rotation, because he only had 4 established starters.
It's not what I would have done, but it could work out just fine.

Pompey just got cut, too.


Dalimon - Price's AL East track record and amazing consistency in performance (I don't see that downward trend you see) is why I'm so confident in him. Not to mention his work ethic and health history. He was uniquely un-risky in terms of these kinds of big contract guys, imo. Of course, he could blow out his arm tommorrow and then my face is covered in eggs.

1. AA was quoted as flat out saying he would not do seven year deals. The exact quote: “You start getting beyond six, I don’t see that occurring." A five year deal and a seven year deal are two different things. In Price's case, it's a difference of $64M that he will get in years 6 and 7 of his current deal at ages 35-36. Price makes more in the final three years of his deal than Martin will get in all five years of his contract combined. It's not comparable at all. The team also operated differently when Ted was alive, so I'm not sure the Wells contract means anything right now.

2. Where are you getting your numbers from? Of the players he re-signed or added from outside the org, it comes out to $27.55M ($10M for Happ, $11.5M for Estrada, $4M for Chavez, $1M for Floyd, and $1.05M for Barney). Storen and Revere were salary neutral with the money changing hands. Unless you're counting Dickey, whose option was a no brainer to pick up. The main reasons for the payroll going back up towards $140M were arb raises and salary escalation for existing contracts (Martin).

3. If the Jays gave Price the same contract as Boston (for example), then Rogers would have been green-lighting $217M over seven years, not $30M over one year. You keep insisting that the money that could have gone to Price was spent on Happ/Estrada/Chavez instead, but that's patently false. Those three combined are a $66M obligation from 2016-18. Price makes $150M more than that by himself. Rogers is not stupid.

I agree that Shapiro would not have re-signed Price regardless (7 years for a 30-year old SP with that amount of mileage on his arm is a huge risk), but in this case, he wouldn't have been able to even if he wanted to. The outside circumstances (ownership, payroll, etc) would have prevented it.

"He inherited a great team with no bad or longterm contracts, and spent a lot of money on fringe players that barely moved the needle on the team's projections."


That great team in your mind includes David Price, even though he was a free agent, so your assessments are both skewed and inaccurate. To suggest no improvement on projections was made when his first trade alone was a 1 win improvement on projections (Chavez over Hendriks) and he inherited a team with 3 SP's in MLB and AAA combined (meaning any SP's he added were also projection increases) makes no sense.

1. the full quote was a discussion of how despite reports to the contrary, the supposed 5yr limit was flexible.

2.

Estrada 13.0
Dickey 12.0
Happ 12.0
Chavez 4.0
Smoak 3.9

That's $45.0m Shapiro chose to spend, and then there's the smaller guys like Barney and Floyd and others.

3. Price costs $30m per year. This year and next year that $30m is assigned to Estrada/Happ/Chavez. In the years following that it will be assigned to someone else that's not price. Unless they decide to just not spend any money at all.

3b. Ownership has signed large, longterm contracts before to lesser players.

"That great team in your mind includes David Price, even though he was a free agent, so your assessments are both skewed and inaccurate."

Nope. This is a great team even without Price.

"To suggest no improvement on projections was made when his first trade alone was a 1 win improvement on projections (Chavez over Hendriks) and he inherited a team with 3 SP's in MLB and AAA combined (meaning any SP's he added were also projection increases) makes no sense."

Fungibility is why it makes sense. The players we paid are barely upgrades on the options we already had in house or were available for peanuts. This is why the needle barely moved on our projections after these signings. Remove an Estrada or Happ or Chavez and increase the innings of a Sanchez or Hutch or Floyd and the projections end up pretty much the same. The redundancy is a nice insurance policy but doesn't improve the team's upside.

p.s. fangraphs depth charts have Hendriks as worth 1.0war in 55ip, and chavez worth 0.5war in 84ip.

1. In that article, AA specifically rules out 7 year deals. So that would rule out Price, right? That alleged offer he made to Jon Lester last year was also five years. There is nothing to suggest he would have offered more years than that.

2. Smoak was arb eligible. While I thought $4M for him was excessive, the only 1B alternative was Colabello and his .400 BABIP. Having some insurance there made sense. It's not like he signed Smoak himself, there was an additional year of control there. He simply offered him arb. As far as the others, you would have declined Dickey's option and replaced his 200 IP with what, exactly? The team barely had any SP's on the roster at the start of the off-season. Not picking up Dickey's option would have been foolish.

3. When payroll is projected, future commitments are taken into account. Price would have been a future commitment. Why would Rogers say "well, we'll probably spend $217M over seven years anyway, so might as well guarantee that for Price"? Right now, they have no obligation for Happ/Estrada/Chavez beyond 2018 when the difference between Happ and Price's salaries will be a shade under $20M. From 2019-22, Price makes $127M. That's a pretty big difference.

While on the topic of projections, I wanted to compare the jays individual projections to what they've actually done the past 2yrs. Because I do think the projections are harsh on many of our players who had late breaks into stardom, because those projections still hold their early career struggles against them.

I didn't want to use WAR again, and for simplicity I just picked one stat from the fangraphs' depth charts to compare. For hitters I use wOBA (would prefer wRC+ but they don't list it), and for pitchers I use ERA.

(Min 100pa/20ip projection)

Player (Age): 2 Year Performance --- Projection (Difference)

Bautista (35): 1339pa, .395woba ---- 595pa, .379woba (-.016)
En'cion (33): 1166pa, .390woba ----- 581pa, .372woba (-.018)
Tulowitzki (31): 909pa, .380woba --- 560pa, .334woba (-.046)
Donaldson (30): 1406pa, .374woba --- 644pa, .368woba (-.006)
Travis (25): 238pa, .370woba ------- 245pa, .328woba (-.042)
Martin (33): 967pa, .354woba ------- 480pa, .328woba (-.026)
Colabello (32): 580pa, .348woba ---- 350pa, .326woba (-.022)
Saunders (290: 299pa, .333woba ----- 315pa, .321woba (-.012)
Pillar (27): 750pa, .309woba ------- 567pa, .312woba (+.003)

Smoak (29): 604pa, .306woba -------- 399pa, .318woba (+.012)
Carrera (28): 265pa, .299woba ------ 203pa, .288woba (-.011)
Goins (28): 621pa, .271woba -------- 420pa, .271woba (-----)
Thole (29): 202pa, .263woba -------- 128pa, .274woba (+.011)

Pompey (23): 146pa, .301woba ------- 238pa, .298woba (-.003)
Ceciliani (26): 75pa, .249woba ----- 133pa, .285woba (+.036)
Barney (30): 292pa, .291woba ------- 175pa, .272woba (-.019)



Stroman (25): 157.2ip, 3.31era --- 186.0ip, 3.72era (-0.41)
Dickey (41): 430.0ip, 3.81era ---- 204.0ip, 4.34era (-0.53)
Estrada (32): 331.2ip, 3.69era --- 163.0ip, 4.26era (-0.57)
Happ (33): 330.0ip, 3.90era ------ 148.0ip, 4.15era (-0.25)
Sanchez (23): 125.1ip, 2.66era --- 142.0ip, 3.98era (-1.32)

Storen (28): 111.1ip, 2.26era ---- 65.0ip, 3.19era (-0.93)
Osuna (21): 69.2ip, 2.58era ------ 65.0ip, 3.16era (-0.58)
Cecil (29): 107.2ip, 2.59era ----- 55.0ip, 2.93era (-0.34)
Floyd (33): 67.2ip, 2.66era ------ 96.0ip, 4.64era (-1.98)
Chavez (32): 303.0ip, 3.83era ---- 84.0ip, 4.14era (-0.31)
Hutchison (25): 335.0ip, 4.97era - 46.0ip, 4.38era (+0.59)
Loup (28): 111.0ip, 3.65era ------ 25.0ip, 3.49era (+0.16)

Tepera (28): 33.0ip, 3.27era ----- 45.0ip, 4.01era (-0.74)
Schultz (30): 51.0ip, 4.24era ---- 40.0ip, 4.14era (+0.10)
Venditte (31): 28.2ip, 4.40era --- 35.0ip, 4.34era (+0.06)
Choate (41): 63.1ip, 4.26era ----- 20.0ip, 3.63era (+0.63)

So basically every single regular aside from Pillar gets worse, and most of them much worse.

Now when you look at the projections granularly, on a case by case basis, you can come up with decent reasons why in each case the projection makes sense. But imo its also important to look at projections holistically - and imo when you see team projections where pretty much every individual is projected to get worse (or better), of any age, then you're looking at a projection that is likely off base.

Last year I noticed a similar pattern in the preseasn projections - nearly every Jay was projected to get worse than their most recent performances, while for example nearly every red sox was projected to get better. This despite there not being a significant age gap between the two rosters. I thought it was suspicious then, and my suspicions seemed to be confirmed as the season played out. I suspect we see a similar result this year.

For a number of reasons - but mostly to do with performances from 4+ years ago - it seems like the Jays have a roster of players who the projections might underrate, while a team like the Red Sox have a roster of players who they might overrate.

So while they are projected similarly on the current depth charts, and the red sox even have a slight edge (1.8war), I'd wager that's not how it ends up in the end.

"1.In that article, AA specifically rules out 7 year deals. So that would rule out Price, right? That alleged offer he made to Jon Lester last year was also five years. There is nothing to suggest he would have offered more years than that."

That article asks AA about the 5yr policy, he specifically says it is flexible and that 6yrs is possible. He does say "when you get to 7 OR MORE years it is unlikely", but imo the "or more" part is key to that sentence as at that point 10yr deals to the likes of Cano, Pujols, Fielder were become commonplace. But do I see a statement from AA as saying that 5yr limit is flexible, and that 6yrs is reasonable....do I think that means 7 years is completely ruled out? no.

"2. Smoak was arb eligible. While I thought $4M for him was excessive, the only 1B alternative was Colabello and his .400 BABIP. Having some insurance there made sense. It's not like he signed Smoak himself, there was an additional year of control there. He simply offered him arb. As far as the others, you would have declined Dickey's option and replaced his 200 IP with what, exactly? The team barely had any SP's on the roster at the start of the off-season. Not picking up Dickey's option would have been foolish."

Those were expenditures he chose to make. Maybe they were good moves, maybe they weren't.

"3. When payroll is projected, future commitments are taken into account. Price would have been a future commitment. Why would Rogers say "well, we'll probably spend $217M over seven years anyway, so might as well guarantee that for Price"? Right now, they have no obligation for Happ/Estrada/Chavez beyond 2018 when the difference between Happ and Price's salaries will be a shade under $20M. From 2019-22, Price makes $127M. That's a pretty big difference."

It's $30m per year. Rogers doesn't care who it's spent on.

Chavez's projections range from 1.5-2.5 WAR. Hendriks' projections are around 0.7-1.0. Given the nature of relievers in general and Chavez's previous two seasons, I think a 1 win difference is a fair projection. Now that could be skewed if Chavez is in the bullpen for an extended period of time, and if that's the case then the deal will look a lot worse, but I'm guessing they acquired him expecting him to be in the rotation. Turns out a better option has, or may have, emerged. He still could start many games. Remains to be seen.

The Jays SP projections are hard to pin point because they have one SP that is undervalued by FIP-based WAR (Dickey), another who is coming off three major surgeries with very limited data in the last 3 years (Floyd), and the narrative for another seems to be that his skill set can make him a FIP-buster as well (Estrada...though I'm skeptical until I see more from him). In other words, there is upside in the projections, just as there is downside. Regardless, adding Happ, Estrada, Chavez, and Floyd did not hurt the team's projections because internally they had no one else to fill those spots. The increase has the potential to be more than fungible, especially when acquisition cost is factored in. Not to mention they still have Hutchison and Sanchez in case they are needed.

There are many ways that the fangraphs projections aren't likely to be accurate in my view.  Here's a big one.  The BABIP for the starting pitchers is projected to be .295 and for the relievers .301.  Last year Blue Jay pitchers had a BABIP of .278 with Dickey, Estrada and a very good defence leading the way.  Circumstances haven't changed much.   There is no reason to believe that any change in BABIP will be of the magnitude that is suggested.

Baseball Tonight doing its grand Top-100 Players list.
http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/page/2016BBTN100_70-61/players-ranked-nos-70-61

They're up to #61 now.

So far Jays on the list are R.Martin #90 and M.Stroman #70. Expect a few more.

I find it amazing that people still argue about Price when he signed a new record for a starting pitcher for his age 30-36 seasons. Outside of HOF'ers I doubt you'd find many pitchers who were worth anywhere near what he'll make over those years. Yeah, Price could be a HOF'er but he could also be a Dwight Gooden (116 ERA+ pre age 30, 99 post). Heck, even greats like Roy Halladay had issues for that range (5 Cy Young calibre years, 2 bad years). I'm sure everyone on this group could come up with dozens of examples of guys who were great pre-30 then collapsed for every case where they didn't.

Quick response. I believe current FA WAR estimates are about $8m/war and projected as $10m/war in about 5yrs. So $9m on average would mean that a $210m contract should buy about 23war. Let's round up to 25war.

Here's a list of the top WAR earners from age 30-36:

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=pit&lg=all&qual=y&type=8&season=2015&month=0&season1=1871&ind=0&team=&rost=&age=30,36&filter=&players=

I'm sure that St. Louis had their very own uglyone when they let Pujols walk, and I doubt that guy has much to say about it these days.

Nah, that online community died when everyone realized how boring it is when everyone agrees with each other.

It's my fault all this Price stuff came back - I posted an article (a NEW article) referring to Price's apparent willingness to sign for less with Toronto, according to David Kaplan, a Chicago radio guy.  No idea how reliable he is - Blue Jays Hunter speculates that he may have ties to Price's agent - but it's possible.  Not sure if anyone arguing against Price read that, but it's worth reading.  Also, why aren't any of the anti-resign Price posters talking about his opt-out?  a 7 year commitment seems pretty unlikely to me. 

IMO, words like 'whining' and 'obvious' aren't really helping this conversation (ironic coming from me - I know I haven't always been friendly to polite conversation).

If I can break my own rule of thumb though, none of this is obvious, because this a subjective discussion.  Price might have signed here, AA might have gone to seven years, the team might be better without Price - who knows.  I look forward to comparing the two strategies - aggressively seeking high end talent vs. conservatively raising the performance floor and maintaining future payroll flexibility.  I will be freaking thrilled if I'm wrong, because it likely means the team is doing well with the likes of Happ, Estrada and Chavez.  Perhaps the AA go for broke approach was perfect to open our window, and the Shapiro approach is perfect to maintaining it. 

IMO, the best reason to hope Price resigned here was that Rogers would have been committing long-term money to the team (although they too may have banked on an opt-out).  I have no faith in their desire to pay for a winning team, or their desire to do anything for the fan experience, unless those moves are guaranteed to be profitable.  IMO, the worst case scenario from a fans POV (I'm assuming we are a great team this year) is that we have a great season, more fans come, the hinted at extra monies fail to materialize and it becomes obvious to us all that Rogers sucks.  I hope that this large, faceless corporation proves me wrong. 
 

Jose de Jesus Ortiz @OrtizKicks
A baseball official tells me the Blue Jays started Jimenez today to showcase him to the #Astros & a few other scouts here to watch him.

Sanchez looking good again. Pretty good battle for the 4th/5th starting spot. :)

ugly, why don't you make it a more realistic list? Pitching in 1885 was somewhat different than today. Plus, 3 or 4-man rotation vs. 5-man rotation will also be a factor - WAR is a counting stat, much like HR. The more playing time you get, the higher it can be. You just can't accumulate WAR by pitching 20+ complete games in a year anymore..

If you start in 1980, there have been 19 pitchers amass 25.1 WAR or better, ages 30-36.

David Price's #1 comp on bbref is Johann Santana - a better start to his career than Price up to age 30, then injured, and done. Of Price's top 10 comps, 6 have finished their careers. Only one of those 6 had a span that was good from 30-36 - the other 5 were all done (below average) well before 37: Johann Santana, John Candeleria, Doug Drabek, Roy Oswalt, Jake Peavy. Yes, I think 3 or 4 of them were seriously injured, right around 2000-2200 innings. That's the POINT - Price is not somehow magically immune to injury, just because you wish it. Even workout freak Roy Halladay wore down at age 35 (90 ERA+, then 55 at age 36). Clemens (most likely) needed steroids.

Boston is hoping that DP opts out after 3 years - the next 3 are the "likely to be good" years. After that, it's hope he's someone else's problem..

Gregor Chisholm @gregorMLB
Sanchez: "We understand if Gavin does get the job, so be it, I'll go down and do what I need to do to make this team better." #BlueJays

VW, Price probably will opt out after three years - which means the Sox scored tremendous value.  This is the scenario in which resigning Price made sense to us. 

Even if he doesn't opt-out, the question is not will he decline- there is way too much objective statistical data to deny this - it's how much surplus value will he generate at the front of the contract vs how much will those last few years cost in terms of negative value.  With the cost of a win on the FA market doubling in the past decade, it's another legit question.

Price would have been a future commitment.

I don't know. He probably opts out and you get an extra draft pick out of that.

It looks like a safe bet. A huge one.

Honestly, though, if Price gave us 2 years of elite Cy pitching, 2 years of good pitching, 2 years of bad pitching, and 1 year of awful pitcing - wouldn't it still be worth it just to take advantage of our current window?

Do we really care if we're carrying one big empty salary when we're in the middle of a rebuild in 5yrs?

One of the axioms of the  'don't resign Price' crowd seems to be that our window closes after this offseason, but I'm just not seeing that.

It's not all about prospects - our young talent (or at least cost-controlled in the case of Goins and Pillar) is pretty elite - Stro, Sanchez, Osuna, Hutch, Travis, Goins, Pillar.

I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that our 2017 rotation is even better than this one, with say two of Hutch, Sanchez and Osuna having won mid / front of rotation roles. 

We will still be strong at catcher and in the IF -Cola could hold down the fort till Tellez or my man McBroom show up. 

Pillar and Pompey should be solid in the OF - so we have one position player hole in RF (assuming we can get a DH pretty easily - hopefully EE).  And jobs up for grabs at the front of the pen.  Guys like Girodo, McFarland, Tepera, Schultz can be counted on to fill out the back end. 

This team has just over $90 million in salary commitments + the guys under team control and the DH contract (say $15 million and $5).  

We still have a strong lineup - Travis, Donaldson, Tulo, EE, RF, Martin, Cola, Pillar, Pompey - strong D, and a strong rotation. 

If we look strong again this year, as I expect, I also expect the FO will keep us competetive for 2017.  And of course, the strength of our farm is in lower level talent - we could easily be a top 15 org as early as next year, especially if one or more of Dickey, Storen, Chavez , Cecil or Saunders is worthy of a QO.  With big walk years, I could easily see one or two QOs from this group, and we know both EE and Jose will warrant one, barring disaster.  

Sanchez looks like today that he wants to be in MLB.

"....you need to stop arguing how much better this team would be if it signed David Price..."

Although personally I'm a little tired of the subject, it's easy enough to skip over the posts if you don't want to read them.  I wouldn't want to tell anyone what to write about in this forum.  If you're fed up with a subject, then it's up to you to create a better debate on another subject.  You just need to provoke discussions on other issues, with your own data and opinions and arguments to stimulate debate.  I'd like to see this site as lively as possible, on any subject that the poster wants to write about.  If you don't like the David Price debate, just distract us with a better debate on something else.

"Honestly, though, if Price gave us 2 years of elite Cy pitching, 2 years of good pitching, 2 years of bad pitching, and 1 year of awful pitcing - wouldn't it still be worth it just to take advantage of our current window?"

Like uglyone, I was disappointed they didn't even attempt to sign Price. Sure it was a risk, but so was trading Thor and d'Arnaud for a late 30s knuckleballer, or signing Chavez, Estrada and Happ for big bucks when they may be one or two year wonders. Price would have helped the young pitchers as we starting to do last season, in addition to making this team as close to a lock for the playoffs as your likely to get.

Having said that, I think overall the new regime has done a pretty good job plugging gaps and building depth. The team may not be as good as it was in the playoffs last year, but I think it is a lot stronger than the team that started last year. It's pretty hard to find holes anywhere on this roster...at least big ones.

Time to move on.

If you're fed up with a subject, then it's up to you to create a better debate on another subject. 

Yup.  Floors yours, folks. 

The roster situation is getting a little clearer these days.  Soriano and Penny have retired.  Pompey, LeBlanc, Dominguez and Diamond were sent to minor-league camp today.  And here's a list of the key players who lack options and could be lost on waivers if they fail to make the 25-man roster:  Lake, Carrera, Brown, Leon, Choate, Delabar, Jenkins, Jimenez, Aardsma, Hernandez.   (Have I missed anyone important?)   And of course Biagini has to be offered back to the Giants if he doesn't make the 25-man roster.

So the key remaining questions are:
 
1) Lake or Carrera for the 4th outfielder?  It seems likely that Ceciliani will be optioned to Buffalo, while Brown doesn't seem to be a strong contender for a roster spot any more.  Lake has been doing well, including defensively in CF, so he might have the edge at this point.

2) Choate or Venditte or Girodo for the LHP spot?  Of those three, Choate is the only one who can't be optioned, so he might have the edge.

3) What to do with Jimenez?  Several teams, including the Astros, are reported to be interested in acquiring him.  My own preference would be to keep him on the roster as the 3rd catcher, at least until he can be traded for a useful prospect or can be sneaked through waivers. 

4) Who gets the 7th spot in the bullpen?  If we exclude those who can be optioned to the minors, and if we assess mostly the buzz from the spring games so far, the frontrunners seem to be Biagini, Delabar and Leon, with perhaps Hernandez and Aardsma having outside shots. 

5) Of course there's still the competition for the 5th starter.  Sanchez looked great again today.  On the other hand, Shapiro gave a radio interview today in which he seemed to emphasize that Sanchez has never pitched more than 130 innings in a season, and some listeners got the feeling that he was hinting at a bullpen role for Sanchez.  Another scenario would have Sanchez starting the season in Buffalo, which would open up an additional bullpen slot, meaning that the Jays could potentially have room for two of Delabar, Leon and Biagini.

Am I overlooking anyone or misjudging the current state of spring competition?

The "OMG we didn't spend $300 million CAD on David Price!" faux complaint has worn thin enough that most can see through it. Isn't it time for the Whinerama crowd to move on to next year's Whinerama topics? Like "OMG, we didn't give Bautista whatever he wanted!" and "OMG, we didn't give Edwin what he wanted!" and "OMG, we didn't give Bryce Harper $800 million CAD!". I'm thinking we can print up tees that read "My rightfielder went to New York and all I got was this lousy t-shirt (and a draft pick)"

Lake or Carrera for the 4th outfielder? It seems likely that Ceciliani will be optioned to Buffalo, while Brown doesn't seem to be a strong contender for a roster spot any more. Lake has been doing well, including defensively in CF, so he might have the edge at this point.

He may also have the edge as a right-handed bat.

The "OMG we didn't spend $300 million CAD on David Price!" faux complaint has worn thin enough that most can see through it. Isn't it time for the Whinerama crowd to move on to next year's Whinerama topics? Like "OMG, we didn't give Bautista whatever he wanted!" and "OMG, we didn't give Edwin what he wanted!" and "OMG, we didn't give Bryce Harper $800 million CAD!". I'm thinking we can print up tees that read "My rightfielder went to New York and all I got was this lousy t-shirt (and a draft pick)"

Classic troll.

The only one whining at the moment is you, CBDC.  How many thousands of years old are you?  You take the 'get off my lawn thing' to new levels.  Did you just learn what OMG meant?

ChinaFan, you're nailing the questions right now so I'll live the big topics to other people to keep the convo going.  As for the minor issues....

IMO, Carrera is irrelevant right now - Lake still ostensibly has upside.  Carrera did too, when we signed him, and then he was mediocre in AAA, mediocre with the MLB team and seemed to lose the one bench-worthy skill that he had in his base stealing. 

Choate looked bad today, but he's one of those guys who always looks bad.  Not having an option doesn't mean much when you were only invited to spring training two weeks ago because of an injury.

I think you already called the best case scenario with Jiminez - keep him on the roster because of an injury or something, and then demote him ASAP to see if he clears waivers.

As far as David Price goes, what's done is done and no amount of analyzing or bickering will bring him back. I'd prefer to concentrate on what we have here. In that vein, I think Gibbons was quoted as saying that he wouldn't be carrying three catchers on the team, but that may have changed since Edwin tweaked his oblique, so Jiminez might be temporarily retained if he isn't traded.

I was reading Gibby praising Ceciliani this morning. Also remarked on young Pompei is.

I'm not of fan of Carrera. I would certainly start with Lake.

I don't see why Venditte wouldn't have the edge. Choate pitching a complete inning is a bad omen.

I don't think Jimenez can be sneaked through waivers. The Jays seems to have develop of taste for DL friendly catching prospects. D'Arnaud is gone, but Pentecost has a lock on that position.

I like Biagini.

I read that Sanchez was resolved to start in AAA if Floyd got the call.  I'm completely fine with Hutch starting anyway.

If Sanchez did go to AAA to start, Hutch would also. That might be the only way Biagini is kept as he is clearly behind Leon in the bullpen competition.

Moving away from the Price topic (which I'm sure we will revisit in a couple of days anyway based on past history), that Sanchez quote is interesting.

"I'll go down and do what I need to do to make this team better."

'Go down' seems to imply the minors, and not the bullpen, unless it was just a throwaway line from Sanchez. They are also emphasizing the development of his off-speed stuff in some of the quotes I've read (one quote had Sanchez talk about how he needs to improve his curve). If the org and Sanchez himself are prepared to start the season in AAA, then as I've said repeatedly all off-season, it would be a pretty good idea. Possibly gain an additional year of control while not having to worry about starting him in the pen and stretching him out later. The only other option would be to start him in the pen and then put him in the rotation mid-season, but these quotes make me think they might be giving the minor league option a bit of thought. Wouldn't surprise me if Sanchez doesn't want to pitch out of the pen. He's made that pretty clear.

As far as Loup's replacement, count me in for not wanting Choate to get the role. An old as hell reliever who can only face one batter an appearance is a waste. Give it to Venditte until Loup is ready, if those are the two options.

"If Sanchez did go to AAA to start, Hutch would also. That might be the only way Biagini is kept as he is clearly behind Leon in the bullpen competition."


Yeah, if Sanchez is sent down to AAA, it would be for Floyd, not Hutchison. If Floyd ends up getting hurt, then I'd imagine that Chavez is probably next on the depth chart. As we saw with Pompey, this FO will utilize options to their advantage. If they have a veteran on the payroll who can do the job effectively, then the youngsters will be used as depth, which is the right move, IMO. We will see what they do with Sanchez, but if even he's on board with going down to AAA to stay stretched out, then it's a no brainer decision. The financial benefit (extra year of control) and development opportunity (work on off-speed stuff, command, etc) goes without saying, but in this case the Jays have to decide what they want to do with Biagini (Rule 5) and Leon/Delabar (out of options). Opening up an extra spot in the pen could make it easier to hold on to two of them if they choose to.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out.

if Sanchez is sent down to AAA to start...

What a horrible thought. He may be raw but his biggest issue is too few innings recently for his arm strength. So why piss away his limited innings in AAA. Let him work on a few things as a multi inning reliever if Floyd gets the call.

Hutch starting in triple A is fine as he needs to get his head aligned. But Sanchez..yikes.

I'm confused why fans seem ok with Hutchison starting in AAA, but not Sanchez. Hutch has a combined 3.8 WAR over the past two seasons, and his ERA was over a run worse than his FIP in 2015 (largely due to a .343 BABIP). Sanchez is not a finished product and struggled as a SP in 2015. He needs to work on his command and secondary stuff. Yet, Hutch needs to be in AAA and Sanchez is MLB ready? That doesn't add up.

I think all of this talk about an innings limit for Sanchez and how this affects the playoff roster needs some context when it comes to the 5th starter.

Outside of Sanchez the other options like Floyd or Chavez won't make the playoff roster regardless.

Even if there is a innings limit on Sanchez he can slide them him to the bullpen at the end of the year for the playoffs.

The kid wants to be a starter, he put in the work to be a starter, has the highest upside of the starters and he has had the results this spring.

Yeah, I took from Sanchez comments after his outing yesterday that he would not be surprised to start in Buffalo
to refine his game - maybe someone has spoken to him - I guess it depends on Floyd continuing to pitch well - with the innings limit quandry I prefer having Sanchez in the rotation in September and the playoffs (hopefully) rather than on opening day - not to mention the potential benefit of delaying FA by a year.

He needs to work on his command and secondary stuff. Yet, Hutch needs to be in AAA and Sanchez is MLB ready? That doesn't add up.


Those are valid questions SK. But imo Hutch needs to get his confidence and consistency back, but has pitched enough innings to handle starting first in AAA then transitioning back to the jays.

Sanchez does not have confidence issues, he has shown he can start at this level- even Gibbons says he had become the best starter before his injury last year- and he has looked strong in the spring. Two of the knocks on Sanchez were his secondary pitches and strikeout numbers and both look solid. Combine that with the fact that he can help the team significantly in the bullpen and i really question why you would waste his limited innings in triple A.

And I'll bet there is a lot of debates and differing opinions in the FO on this one. It's an interesting issue.

for the record the toronto star game report made sure to indicate that Sanchez' "going down there" quote referred to the bullpen, perhaps in response to a direct question on it.

I suspect at this point Sanchez would be shocked and disappointed to be sent down as would his teammates. Unless he has an ERA over 5 in June with someone in AAA doing great I can't see him going down. In a fantasy league I could see it but not in one with real live players. This is a guy who started 11 times last year and threw in 9 games in the post season without allowing a run.

Osuna a case could be made for as he only relieved last year and hasn't started above A+ with just 27 minor league starts to his name plus 2 at age 16 in the Mexican League. 210 2/3 professional innings total.

Gibby says Pillar will likely be the leadoff hitter to start the season. I am not a fan of this move at all. I'd go with Saunders or Martin myself.

If Sanchez goes to Buffalo, it will be to work on his secondary pitches. His inning limit doesn't change just because he's in AAA, so the best could be to put him on a low pitch count there, otherwise, he might not have much left when he's needed in Toronto.

I don't expect Floyd to last very long.

Hutch remains a solid option. His adjustment to last year is to keep his fastball low in the zone.
I'm expecting more from him than from Happ whose adjustment is just to throw more fastballs.
That was only working because he didn't face many good right handed hitters.

I actually like it.

He's the leadoff only for the first inning after that he's basically the 9th hitter.
Hitting first, there will be opportunities to pinch hit for him if the team is trailing. Not sure if Gibby will do that.
As long as he doesn't swing on the first pitch, I don't see an issue.

Consider, if he gets on base there's 0 out, a good baserunner on base and a whole lot of good hitters to cash him.
Also he hit 31 doubles last year, so then the hitters can just swing for the fences and score him on a sac fly if they miss.

And best of all, everybody is happy.

I don't think Hutch has confidence issues. It was more of an execution problem.
Hutch is still young, but he's not working on a new pitch or anything like that.
He has full control of all his pitches and what you see is what you get.

The variation on his slider is intentional.
He could use it more and fiddle with it more, but that's not what he wants to do.
His game isn entirely based on fastball command and unlike Estrada, his strategy it too keep it down.

"Sanchez does not have confidence issues, he has shown he can start at this level- even Gibbons says he had become the best starter before his injury last year- and he has looked strong in the spring. Two of the knocks on Sanchez were his secondary pitches and strikeout numbers and both look solid. Combine that with the fact that he can help the team significantly in the bullpen and i really question why you would waste his limited innings in triple A."


Sanchez probably didn't lack confidence last season either yet was walking over 5 per 9 with a FIP over 5.00 as a SP. The problem with ST numbers is there are so many variables involved. What types of lineups has he been facing? Have his K's been swings and misses (a weakness for him) or called strike 3's? How many swings and misses has he been getting in general? Even then, he's not facing real big league lineups consistently so it's hard to really take anything at face value. His velocity looks great as it usually does, but I'm hearing mixed reports on how good his off-speed stuff looks, and you can't be fooled by good command in ST when he has a pro career dating back to 2010 that says otherwise. Maybe he has improved in that area, but how many ST innings supersede five plus years of data?

Hutchison on the other hand has big league success, and his peripherals last season were good enough to warrant labeling him a bounce back candidate. Could he improve on some things? Absolutely. He has very little minor league experience above Double-A so I'm sure there are aspects of his game he can work on in Buffalo. However, strictly from a readiness standpoint, I don't see the logic in being OK with Hutch in the minors and somehow finding it an insult to waste Sanchez's innings in the minors when the latter is not as good in the SP role as the former. If you're worried about wasting quality IP in the rotation, then it would be more logical to question why Hutchison is headed to Buffalo. If you don't want to waste Sanchez's innings in the bullpen, then that's a different story. He's obviously a big league bullpen option right now, and if that's where he ends up to start the year, I could see the logic in that. For the record, I'm fine with Hutch starting in Buffalo, especially since I think Floyd (if healthy) and Chavez are solid options for the fifth spot right now. Hutch will probably be needed some time during the season anyway.

I think with recent experience both ways - Dickey, Estrada, Sanchez for the good, Hutch, Happ, and even Cecil for the bad - jays fans in particular have good reason to not blindly trust FIP.

and even the guys that created FIP have realized its limits, which is why a site like fangraphs now includes an average of fwar/ra9war leaderboard.

there's good reasons why people are leaning towards sanchez over hutch at the moment - 1.it's easy to see just how nasty sanchez' stuff really is, while hutch we can see has much less wiggle room when his command isn't there 2.Sanchez seems to have a very real skill in getting weak contact, which fip is blind to 3.hutch seems to have real problems out of the stretch, which again fip is blind to. 4.Sanchez has seemed to take a significant step forward on his biggest weakness - command - and people are eager to give him anchance to see if that improvement is real (because if it is, he can be excellent even without a reliable 3rd pitch). Meanwhile, Hutch is still searching for the dominant command that made him such a good prospect before TJ, and people are more inclined to wait until he shows signs of improvement there before demanding he get a chance.

And I'm sure there are other reasons.


Personally Hutch was always a pet prospect of mine who I always thought wqs underrated, while Sanchez was the guy I thought overrated....but I'm starting to accept that I didn't quite appreciate how great sanchez' tools were, nor how crucial pinpoint command was to hutch's success.

I still believe in Hutch of course...but I'd be less surprised if he ended up taking the Cecil route to relief success than I would have been a year or two ago.

also not a fan of pillar in leadoff, as he's literally the worst hitter in our healthy starting lineup. Of course batting order doesn't matter much but it's still givinh an extra 60ab to your worst hitter. Still, having players slotted into comfortable roles is probably more important in the end.

If Pillar is truly horrible in the lead, somebody else will take it. Unless the Jays are winning and everybody is happy, then why bother?

About sending players to Buffalo or below it in the echelon of minor league affiliates, can we have a list of minor league options for each player ?

Junior Lake = 0 left
Ezequiel Cabrera = 0 left
Sanchez = ? left
Pompey = ? left
Diamond = ? left
Dominguez = ? left
Rowen = ? left
McFarland = ? left
Dragmire = ? left
Casilla = ? left
... to be continued [by other posters ?]

One way to check who is leading in battles is to see what quality of opponent they've been seeing. Odds are anyone the Jays hope to have on the roster will be facing tougher competition than guys who they intend to send to AAA.

Luckily B-R gives a score to indicate quality of opponent. 10 - faced all MLBers, 8 - avg of AAA, 7 - avg of AA, 5 - High A, 4 - Low A and 1.5 to 3 short-season players.

Skipping the obvious guys and a 10 PA minimum
IF: Darwin Barney 7.8, Matt Dominguez 7.7, Jon Berti 7.6, David Adams 7.3, Jio Mier 6.7, Richard Urena 6.1, Andy Burns 5.9

OF: Pompey 8.1, Dominic Brown 7.9, Junior Lake 7.8, Ezequiel Carrera 7.8, Rowdy Tellez 7.5, Darrell Ceciliani 7.3, Anthony ALford 7.3, Roemon Fields 7.1, Casey Kotchman 6.8

For pitching it is worth noting that Gavin Floyd has faced a low quality of opponent 6.8 (just below AA), the other main contenders for the rotation were at 8+ (Chavez 8.7, Sanchez 8.5).

Pillar batting leadoff seems odd to me too given his OBP, but he did generate the second most BsR (baserunning runs) in the game last year, according to Fangraphs, with 8.1 (.1 ahead of, uhh, Ben Revere).

How much weight do you guys put into the theory that he'll get better pitches to hit with murderer's row v2 behind him?    This article crunches some numbers to suggest that Pillar's hitting in particular may benefit more from seeing more fastballs than other hitters normally do.

http://jaysfromthecouch.com/2016/02/29/kevin-pillar-leadoff-toronto-blue-jays-mlb-analysis/

CyberCavalier, google the bluebird banter options table. 

Pitchers in consideration for a starting job will typically not be used against division rivals.

http://www.torontosun.com/2016/03/19/blue-jays-dont-have-it-in-their-plans-to-re-sign-encarnacion-slugger-says

“I want to stay here,” Edwin Encarnacion told the Toronto Sun Saturday morning after rain chased the Blue Jays inside and canceled a spring-training game against the Phillies.

“I’m really disappointed that nothing has happened, but it’s not my decision.

“They don’t have it in their plans for me to stay here.”

“I tried to do the best for my team, I feel as if I have done all I can do for my team,” said Encarnacion, who turns 34 next January. “I want to be here for a long time."

Encarnacion.
I'm glad he really wants to stay. All he has to do is accept his Q.O. then - great.

There's always a chance EE isn't offered the Q.O. - after all, they run this risk of him accepting it, thereby blocking a minimum wage prospect from taking the DH position.

We finally have a great team and season, and Rogers hires a new guy that manages to come in and insult all of AA, Price, Bautista, and EE before his first game. nice.

glad they avoided arby with donaldson, i guess.

I don't have any problem with arbitration. Some teams try to avoid it on principle. I don't think that makes them better in any way. I look at it like one of those trends like wearing your socks over your pants or not letting the players wear beards.

I would have to have a terrible season not to get a QO.

The way I see it, the QO gives the home team a small advantage in negotiation.
Worked fine for Estrada.

he only way EE picks up the QO is if he has a major down year - with him primarily DHing, and thus with lesser injury risk, I don't see that happening.  Really wanting to be with the team doesn't mean leaving tens of millions on the table.

Uglyone is right though - these PR hits just keep on coming.  A quote like "they don't have it in their plans for me to stay here" is pretty, uhh, ugly.  Stoeten tries to put his positive spin on this issue - he's typically on the conservative, cautious Shaptkins side of these issues - thusly:  "Already one can see the potential for this to become yet another tricky PR situation for the Blue Jays. “It’s an insult!” they’ll say. “Where’s the respect???” But the thing -- and the thing that someone like Jose Bautista would exactly tell you -- is that it’s all about business."

But I don't think that argument has a ton of weight.  The Jays could follow the 'all business' approach and still make offers to their big name FAs that aren't lowballs - or non-existent.   It's not like the Jays are making efforts to be fan friendly - this off season feels more like a bandage being ripped off.  Get all the business-friendly / fan-unfriendly moves over in one offseason and count on the sweetness of the playoff run to help fans swallow the bitter pill. 

This Ben Nicholson-Smith nugget on MLB trade rumours was interesting:

The 2015-2016 offseason was the winter of the opt-out. Don’t count on the Blue Jays to join the trend. Per team president Mark Shapiro said: “In some ways they’re just another form of a player option which I think are ridiculous. You’ll never see us do a player option.” Shapiro does allow that there are circumstances where an opt out can make sense. In other words, he’s not as firmly against them as player options. While an anti-opt out stance eliminates many top free agents, the Blue Jays typically play in the bargain end of the pool.

The offhanded 'bargain end of the pool' comment is sadly spot on, and I wonder if the refusal to do an opt-out is the reason we made no offer to Price.

I hadn't heard Shapiro say this before, have you guys?  It feels a lot like Beeston's 'no FA deal past five years".  I actually like both rules as general principals (who doesn't?) but they also provide some pretty convenient excuses for the FO.  And it's not like there isn't a TON of info available about the value of the opt out to the player AND the team.

yes, it's better for the player, but categorizing them as 'ridiculous' is a bit rich when lots of teams have already started handing them out - including such badly run franchises as the Cubs, Giants and Dodgers.  Even KC's deal with Kenenedy, widely panned by everyone, has an interesting backloaded structure that makes the deal look less bad for the team than at first glance.  Does anyone think the Mets aren't thrilled with the Cespedes deal? 

I just can't see one scenario in which this doesn't count as bungled PR.  This stuff has to bother the players too, no? 

Player opt outs put all the risk on the team, and very little (if any) on the player. If a player opts out, then yes, the team benefits from getting what would have likely been X amount of good seasons, but they also lose what could have been more good seasons with more surplus value depending on when the opt out was used. For example, if Bautista had an opt-out after 2014, and went elsewhere, we'd look back at say "he had a great contact and the Jays got tremendous value", but then the Jays would have lost out of his 2015 and 2016 years at a reasonable cost where he still figured to be surplus value. It really should be a case by case basis. An opt out for someone like Jason Heyward makes sense. Age and projection plays a big part. If you signed someone to a contract hoping he opts out, then chances are you're expecting dead value later in the deal, which again, puts all the burden on the team. I can understand Shapiro's point, but at the end of the day, it comes down to talent. An opt out for Heyward would have been fine with me. An opt out for Scott Kazmir (which the Dodgers gave) makes less sense.

As far as Edwin, it's definitely a PR hit, but clearly the team is ready to move on from both of them. They don't want to lock into two sluggers in their mid-30's who both will likely be DH's long-term unless it fits whatever contract they have in mind (a two-year deal has been speculated for Edwin). I think it's the right call long-term, and I've been saying that all winter, but the optics of it will look bad. There's no way around it. Lose both, and it will be a (crap)storm. Shapiro/Atkins just have to replace those guys adequately. This winter I didn't have a problem with the safe approach because I think safe works with this 2016 core. In 2017, when you're replacing a projected 7-8 WAR (give or take) for $24M, the talent upgrades will have to be more significant.

There's days I wonder why I'm still a Jays fan..... Damn I miss the Expo's.

pretty sure mathesond was making a funny.

"Shapiro/Atkins just have to replace those guys adequately."

They will only sign FAs that fall down below $15/yr and will sign for 3-4yrs max. Don't hope for anything more.

The disconnect between the flowery positivity that Shapiro and Atkins spout compared to the blunt candor of Jose, and now Edwin, is jarring.

I suppose nickle-and-diming is par for the course when you let payroll slide down to middle of the pack while you're supposedly priming for a World Series run, but it sure is ugly to watch.

"The disconnect between the flowery positivity that Shapiro and Atkins spout compared to the blunt candor of Jose, and now Edwin, is jarring."

well said.

Buck and Pat are discussing analytics. I am hoping that next inning they take on quantum mechanics, and the inning after the mystery of the Caramilk bar.

Pretty sure the TV needs to stay off until April. I don't have enough springtime reps yet to be able to deal with these two clowns.

Chuck, I love it when they discuss analytics.  As an admitted statistical amateur, every time I find myself thinking 'wait a minute Buck' I consider it a step forward in my knowledge base.

For whatever reason, I find Pat much harder to listen to then Buck. 

 

Player opt outs put all the risk on the team, and very little (if any) on the player.

Long contracts put high risks on team. Opt out have nothing to do with it.
Contract don't put any risks on players unless the contracts under value the player which is very rare nowadays.
Especially for players who have peaked and are expecting to decline.
If a mid 30 players sign a 5 year contract and opt out after 2 years, the team does not suffer a loss.
If anything he relieves the teams from the remainder of the contract which carries the most risk.

You sign players to their market value. If you pay less you get less.
If you want players for 2 years and their market value dictate a 4 or 5 year contract, you add an opt-out, but you can't rely on that. The problem might be the ability of Bats and EE to refuse a trade given their long standing with the team. Ironically, that standing is what endear them to the fans who pay the tickets.

Replacing top performers who want to be here by affordable players who wants to be somewhere else isn't likely to reflect positively in the win column. Because of the turf, DH/1B is precisely where you want to spend on free agents.

The offhanded 'bargain end of the pool' comment is sadly spot on, and I wonder if the refusal to do an opt-out is the reason we made no offer to Price.

Nope. No offer was made to Price because they knew how much it would take.

Tulo and Martin are in the top 100 best paid players in baseball while the highest paid player in Cleveland is Santana a 1.1 WAR player last year at 8.25M. Third highest paid is Chris Johnson who has been released.

It is not difficult to see how the 2016 Jays could make the playoffs with no contribution from EE. Today's lineup without them both could win the east.

After their negotiation via the media I have no trouble with Bautista and EE leaving in 2017. Let them get paid by whoever decides to give them the money. The Jays got lucky on them both and neither departure will be as aggravating to me as Delgado's.

"....After their negotiation via the media...."

I don't think this is a fair or accurate statement, and it certainly doesn't justify their departures from the Jays.  In fact, both Bautista and Encarnacion have said very little to the media.  A few sentences, that's all.  And considering that they are surrounded by media every day, and considering that their contract status is one of the biggest stories in camp, they have been quite restrained.  Would you expect them to say absolutely zero?  I don't think that's realistic or fair.  We don't expect Shapiro or Atkins to say nothing on the contract negotiations -- they are asked about it regularly and they always claim that everything is fine, everything is under control, they are eager to reach agreement, etc etc, so why can't Bautista and Encarnacion occasionally give a corrective?  They shouldn't have to leave the media field totally dominated by Jays management with no voice of their own.

scottt, the issue with opt outs is that if they are exercised by the player then the team is likely losing a player that is exceeding the value of the contract, and if they are not exercised, then the team is stuck with what is likely a player that is not yielding the desired results. So in that sense, there's a ton of risk even with the opt outs. If someone opts out after age 35, then you're probably OK with that because of anticipated decline, but players are smart enough to put the opt out at a reasonable age bracket (say, between 29-32 where they can realistically get a bigger/longer contract).

I understand your point, and like I said I think it makes sense as long as the player you are getting is worth it, but I'm looking at it from Shapiro's argument. I'm sure most teams would prefer not to give those clauses out, but some times to get the player you have to cater to them. I would hope if the Jays are seriously considering a difference making talent at the right age that a player opt out wouldn't take them out of the running, but again, it should be for the right type of player. Giving an opt out to Wei Yin Chen and Scott Kazmir seems excessively unnecessary.

My $.02: even if the Jays are willing to sign Bautista and Encarnacion, they will be competing with teams that are willing to overpay for aging great players.

For example, the Mariners will be paying Robinson Cano through his age-40 season, and the Angels will be paying Albert Pujols through his age-41 season. Both players were younger than Jose and EE are now, but both Jose and EE are among the best players in the game, and somebody is going to want to pay them for enough years to make the end of the contract likely become dead money.

While I would prefer that Rogers shell out lots of money to keep Jose and EE - it's not my money, after all - if the Jays let them go, they will be doing what they pretty much always have done. The Jays have only ever kept two of their aging stars when they became free agents - Joe Carter and Vernon Wells - and neither turned out well. Carter spent three years in Toronto as a negative WAR player, and Wells was paid $21 million in 2014 to not play baseball for anyone.

By the way: I've heard rumours that the Jays weren't planning on re-signing Wells, but that Paul Godfrey overruled his baseball people. Is this true or an urban legend?

Chris taylor, I agree with you that Delgado's loss was more stinging that I anticipate the losses of Jose and Edwin ... but you aren't the first person to mention 'negotiating through the media', which I find odd.  Those comments are usually dismissive of Jose and EE using this as a strategy as well - personally, I think negotiating through the media is fine, and I don't really think either Delgado or EE are doing that.  

For what it's worth, a caller on Wilner today said the exact same thing and Wilner dismissed outright the idea that Jose (specifically) was negotiating through the media. 

Let's say that it's true though - why is that a problem?

Scottt, have you seen the Fangraphs articles on the 'value' of the opt-out to the player?  They put a tangible number on it ($10 million I think in Price's case, without looking it up). 

So the team DOES suffer a 'loss', but it's a loss that they are hoping to suffer, and they have factored this into the deal.  Is there any scenario in which the player's opt-out is NOT in the team's best interests?  When they sign these deals, they are counting on surplus value in the first few seasons.  A player opting out is win-win IMO. 

I do think we could have signed Price to a deal worth a fair bit less than Boston did, counting on the player to opt-out.  In this scenario (Price opts out after 3 years), we have not a lot more money on the books than we do with Estrada and Happ. 

Not to restart that debate - I just feel like the aggressive GM move this offseason was precisely that - mitigate the risk of a long term contract with the opt-out, and bank on the right player.  Rolling the dice isn't always wise - AA would want that Mets deal back - but he had the creativity to engineer a Price deal that could have fit into our payroll parameters. 

"Tulo and Martin are in the top 100 best paid players in baseball while the highest paid player in Cleveland is Santana a 1.1 WAR player last year at 8.25M. Third highest paid is Chris Johnson who has been released."

they're still paying bourn and swisher not to play, too.

Ch-ch-ch-changes.  I have no idea what Encarnacion and Bautista are asking and what Shapiro and Atkins are offering (if anything).  I'd love to see one or both stay as much as the next person, but absent figures, I don't know how a young or old person in front of a computer in a basement can possibly say something useful about the situation. 

Let's take a hypothetical.  Suppose Shapiro and Atkins were offering 3 years/$75 million to each.  No options.  Nothing.  Both players might want more total dollars and a longer period (and might indeed be able to get it on the open market), but I wouldn't find fault with either player or GM if that were the case. 

but absent figures, I don't know how a young or old person in front of a computer in a basement can possibly say something useful about the situation.

Speak for yourself Mike Green!  Not sure if I count as young or old, but I've got a lovely 2nd floor window behind my computer ...

Really nice short article on Bo Schultz.  I always love a good longshot success story, but the comments from his wife - who put a promising media career on hold to support Schultz - are cool.  They had a place downtown and her experience was totally playoff fever 24-7 - she said that the fans of Toronto "just bleed Blue Jays". 

http://clubhousecorner.com/2016/03/17/bo-schultz-toronto-blue-jays/

Bourn and Swisher were mentioned, and that might give us a glimpse as to why Shapiro might be a bit gunshy about long-term deals to players in their 30's.

Michael Bourn
Age 26: 4.8 WAR
Age 27: 4.4 WAR
Age 28: 3.8 WAR
Age 29: 6.2 WAR
Signs with Cleveland
Age 30: 1.7 WAR
Age 31: 0.4 WAR
Age 32: 0.0 WAR

Nick Swisher
Age 28: 2.9 WAR
Age 29: 4.3 WAR
Age 30: 3.4 WAR
Age 31: 4.0 WAR
Signs with Cleveland
Age 32: 2.1 WAR
Age 33: -1.7 WAR
Age 34: -0.6 WAR

Swisher's skill set was more "old people skills", while Bourn was speed/defense with an average bat, but two completely different players with two completely different skill sets just fell apart in their 30's.

If Shapiro wasn't a fan of free agency before that, I'm sure that experience didn't help change his mind.

I don't think Bautista and EE are negotiating through the media. They're just being honest with their fans.
Delgado made most of his money playing for Toronto.

In the end, he was making almost 20M a year in Toronto. He signed with the Marlin for 5/58 on a superbly backloaded contract. The Marlins paid him 4M for the first year and traded him to the Mets. He gave them one good year, 2 mediocre ones and a bad one for 54M.

yep, shapiro should have ponied up for his elite pitcher sabathia instead of trying to be clever with 2nd/3rd tier free agents. lesson learned.

I'm not falling for that, ugly. At least not on a Sunday. Bring up Price again when I'm bored at work and need to kill time.

Also, just an FYI, in the four seasons prior to signing with Cleveland (from ages 26-29), Bourn accumulated a WAR of 19.2. By comparison, from 2012-15 (last four seasons), Bautista's total WAR is 18.1 (age 31-34) and Encarnacion's is 16.4 (age 29-32). So if Bourne was a 2nd or 3rd tier free agent at the time in your mind, then I hope you haven't been encouraging the Jays to sign either of JB or EE. Expecting Bourne to turn into a replacement level player at age 31 would have taken some high level of foresight. Even as a 2 WAR player he would have earned the contract he was given. He just declined terribly. Swisher was probably the more predictable decline of the two.

Also, I know how you feel about Price (for some reason Glenn Close and Michael Douglas come to mind there) but what does trading Sabathia in 2008 have to do with signing two players in 2013? It would be like saying the Jays should have re-signed Halladay instead of trading for Dickey/Marlins and signing Melky three years later. Unless it was a troll post, in which case carry on.

"For what it's worth, a caller on Wilner today said the exact same thing and Wilner dismissed outright the idea that Jose (specifically) was negotiating through the media. "

I will back track what I meant/feel is less negative than it reads -- that said I think Wilner is just plain wrong, how else is one supposed to describe Bautista stating a firm demand to a reporter as anything other than negotiation? That is his opening negotiating position, is it not? He said it to the media, did he not?

There's nothing wrong with what he's doing, but it is a matter of taste and I don't like it and rather he gave the nothing vague statements of Shapiro and Atkins. Would we not jump on them if they said, "No there's no way we'll ever sign Bautista, his demands are unrealistic for a player of his age and inevitable decline"?

" I don't know how a young or old person in front of a computer in a basement can possibly say something useful about the situation. "

Is anything on any baseball site useful? We're a small sample of opinions and personally, I have thoroughly enjoyed what EE and Bautista have given the Jays, much more than anyone could have realistically hoped for when the were acquired (or in EE's case acquired and re-acquired).

I hope that the fans don't get wrapped up in keeping them post-2016 and the Jays follow what has been their way (save as Dave Till mentioned in the case of Carter and Wells). The chances that any one pickup will be blossom like they have, but they can roll the dice on a number of lottery tickets, add up all those opportunities the chances of the Jays digging up another gem versus the two of them providing fair value for what it would take to sign them today seems a better strategy.

Also, I don't have a basement and wrote the comment from my living room watching the game today -- a game, which perhaps not coincidentally to my state of mind at the time of writing the comment, featured neither EE of Bautista. Time to move on I think. Also, perhaps, time for those hardcore Jays fans who'll be back at the beginning of 2016 to disabuse the casual fans who were there at the end of 2015 that EE or Bautista are essential for success in 2017.

Really nice short article on Bo Schultz... fans of Toronto "just bleed Blue Jays". http://clubhousecorner.com/2016/03/17/bo-schultz-toronto-blue-jays/

That writer needs to study verb tenses. There is now a past tense.

Sorry, someone has to represent Dewey.

Tulowitzki is apparently back, and I expect the offence to run roughshod over the league again in 2016.  Opening day can't come soon enough.

as per shapiro on XM - Gibbons' rolling anti-lameduck extension clause has been removed from his contract (which makes him a lameduck), and it sounds pretty clear that Sanchez is in the bullpen (something along the lines of "with floyd the only question is health, with sanchez the question marks are both innings limits and ability to be an effective SP" - i.e. more risk factor analysis).

"what does trading Sabathia in 2008 have to do with signing two players in 2013"

just another example of one big elite contract being not as risky as multiple "value" contracts.

"So if Bourne was a 2nd or 3rd tier free agent at the time in your mind, then I hope you haven't been encouraging the Jays to sign either of JB or EE. Expecting Bourne to turn into a replacement level player at age 31 would have taken some high level of foresight. "

nobody wanted to beat the 4 x $12m deal for Bourn. that makes him 2nd/3rd tier imo. the entire baseball world didn't trust his defensivd metrics apparently.

Wouldn't Sabathia be his own counterweight (not a fat joke, really)? Since signing him to an extension after 2011 (his age 30 season), he's had one year with an ERA or FIP above average.

Don't forget that Bourn still got his deal in February, when there wouldn't be many suitors bidding in the higher end of the pool. Also, even just a couple years ago defense was still undervalued. Maybe his defensive metrics were also not trusted, but he'd posted between far above average to near godly for 3 of his prior 4 seasons (and was about average before then). If that's to be our interpretation, then why would we outsiders ever bother to look at defensive metrics again if they are so divergent from reality? In actuality, though, it just feels like post facto rationalization.

The anger that Shapiro won't sign 2 mid 30's sluggers to long term deals at over $15 mil a year (probably over $20 mil is being asked) seems funny to an older fan like myself.

I remember the 83-93 teams and how the Jays were hit for not signing 40 year old Dave Winfield (0 WAR over next 3 years then retired), then they got 36 year old Paul Molitor and fans complained when he left (5.2 WAR over his final 3 years in Minnesota). Devon White left after his age 32 season and had 9.7 WAR over the next 6 seasons, Joe Carter was held onto like he was gold until Cito was fired and post 1993 produced -0.9 WAR here, -1.8 overall. They never had a shot at resigning Rickey Henderson (15.8 WAR over his remaining 10 seasons, he was 34 when here, never was negative for WAR), Tony Fernandez was the only other over 30 hitter and he was screwed by his agent (Jays offered $3 mil over 2 years iirc, no one else wanted him at SS, Cincinnati signed him for 3B during spring) he produced well when he came back to Toronto but otherwise was a sub 2 per year guy.

So the best teams in Jays history with 2 WS between them shouldn't have re-signed any of the over 30 crowd they had outside of one they had no hope to resign (Henderson) and one who produced all his value when he came back years later. The 1985 team had the 'best outfield in baseball' all 25 years old. By 32 all were in negative WAR per year category or retired.

My point is that investing in players over 30 is a massive risk and only an idiot would spend a fortune on it. The Yankees got away with it mostly last year with A-Rod, Teixeira, and Beltran all hitting well but I wouldn't be shocked if all 3 are albatrosses this year.

No smart GM would sign EE, a pure DH, to more than 3 years $50 mil imo. Bautista 5/$100 would be my absolute limit, but I'd want to wait until after this year to make sure the risk is as small as possible - if upper management was saying 'we really need him' and the teams scouts/coaches/etc. were high on his health/fitness I might go as high as $120. His goal of $150+ million over 6 years is pure fantasy but if some GM is insane enough to give it to him, go ahead I say. The Jays can sign him for a September come back at the end while the other team is still paying him as a goodbye party.

"yep, shapiro should have ponied up for his elite pitcher sabathia instead of trying to be clever with 2nd/3rd tier free agents. lesson learned."

They got Michael Brantley (and Laporta who was an excellent prospect who didn't turn out so well) for Sabathia who had a few months remaining on his contract which they would never have been able to afford. It was an excellent trade. You really think a team with a $60-65M payroll should have invested about 40% of that payroll on one pitcher? (not to mention that the last 4 years of Sabathia's contract,you'd have to spend $100M on a replacement level starter who likely wouldn't even make Cleveland's rotation. Great value there. Certainly no risk involved.)

".....it sounds pretty clear that Sanchez is in the bullpen...."

I admit that Gavin Floyd has pitched better than I expected -- and probably better than the entire league has expected, since a $1-million salary is pretty darn cheap for a veteran starting pitcher these days.  If Ffloyd is pitching strongly enough to warrant a rotation spot, that's okay with me.  But I worry that the Jays will waste Sanchez's extraordinary potential as an ace starter.  If he goes back to the bullpen in 2016, what's the plan?  I would love to know Shapiro's thinking here.  He doesn't strike me as someone who wastes the value of a key asset.  So how does Sanchez improve in the bullpen?  Is he supposed to work on his curve ball in a tense high-leverage 8th-inning situation with runners on the bases?  Sending him down to Buffalo is an option, but that's a huge slap in the face to a pitcher who has proven the ability to get major-league hitters out.  And it hurts the Jays, who would surely benefit from having him somewhere on the major-league roster.

I know that you can't draw definite conclusions from spring training, but personally I think Sanchez is showing improvement, reducing his walks, increasing his strikeouts, using his off-speed stuff more effectively (if not yet as effectively as Floyd).  For an improving 23-year-old pitcher, you have to give extra emphasis to the most recent evidence, rather than the evidence of 2013 or 2014.  Personally I think the Jays should take a chance on him for a month or two at least, with Floyd as the Plan B.  Spring training might be a bad place to judge a veteran hitter, but it still has some value in assessing the current performance of young pitchers and rebounding veteran pitchers.

It's possible that Shapiro and Atkins are still completely undecided about the 5th starter, and their cautious comments about Sanchez are just a way of lowering his expectations, so that he's not shocked if he fails to make the rotation.   Perhaps the next couple of starts by Floyd and Sanchez will determine the decision.

On the decision to put Kevin Pillar in the leadoff spot:  I agree that his career OBP statistics don't justify it, but I can still see an argument for it.  There were few other options.  Saunders? His career OBP isn't any better than Pillar's, and he seems to be morphing into a power hitter who should be hitting further down in the lineup, with a greater chance of runners on base.  Tulowitzki? He has a high OBP but he's also a great slugger and I like him in the 5th spot in the lineup.  Goins?  Still too raw as a hitter, and nobody knows if his August 2015 performance is sustainable.

But the biggest argument for Pillar as leadoff hitter is Pillar's own character and personality.  He seems to respond to challenges.  He has an incredible work ethic and a hunger to improve.  He wants the leadoff job. He'll be under pressure to prove that he can do it.  He has responded to this kind of pressure in the past.  I like the fact that the Jays are willing to challenge him.  They're giving him a new challenge:  get on base.  This will require him to improve his career OBP numbers, but who's to say that he cannot improve?  Nobody has won by betting against Pillar's career trajectory in the past.  He's got a chip on his shoulder, a desire to prove the critics wrong.  So let's see if he can do it.  It's also good for team morale -- it sends a message that those who desire a tough new challenge can be allowed to have it.  (Unfortunately that's a message that could be contradicted if Sanchez is sent to the bullpen, but that's a separate debate.)

ugly, Sabathia had a couple of months left on his contract before he was a free agent by the time he was traded. The Indians had a payroll around $80M at the time and Sabathia ended up signing a deal with the Yankees where he got an AAV of $23M. I'm not sure what your point was. There was no way they were going to re-sign him. The Swisher/Bourn signings happened 4+ years later. Those signings had no connection with each other.

I also find it amusing that you used this particular transaction as a way to not only sneak in a David Price reference but also bash Shapiro.

Since 2011 (Sabathia's age 30 season)...

Sabathia: 15.0 WAR, $115M salary
Brantley: 15.4 WAR, $7.9M salary

Sabathia's WAR from 30-onwards were 6.4, 4.7, 2.6, 0.1, and 1.2 respectively, while his FIP in the last three seasons were 4.10, 4.78, 4.68 respectively. Considering your stance on signing ace pitchers in their 30's to seven year deals, that's an odd comp to bring up. When you factor in that it was a move that actually benefited the Indians greatly in the long run, I'm not sure what you were going for.

"nobody wanted to beat the 4 x $12m deal for Bourn. that makes him 2nd/3rd tier imo. the entire baseball world didn't trust his defensivd metrics apparently."


Defensive metrics can fluctuate year to year, but Bourn had four very good seasons in a row and one elite season behind his speed and defense. Defensive awareness has definitely changed in 2016 compared to 2012/13, so it's possible the Indians thought they were getting an undervalued bargain at the time. I haven't followed Bourn's career so I don't know if he got hurt or what happened to him, but to drop from 4-6 WAR in his prime to replacement level at age 31 is a pretty steep drop. Even with a more natural decline (say, dropping to a 2.0-2.5 WAR player), he still could have been worth the contract he was given. He just fell off the map completely.

I've said before that I'm not a fan of Kevin Pillar long-term due to defensive decline as he ages, but if he put up 4 straight seasons like Bourn had in his late-20's, it would certainly change some perception of him.

No argument from me on Swisher, though. I'm not going to say that I saw his steep decline coming, but his skill set certainly doesn't age well typically.

1. Bourn - fact is he signed for 4 x $12m. He was a 2nd/3rd tier FA in GM's minds, and it turns out they were right. He was a 5war player much in the same way as, say, Kevin Pillar is.

2. Sabathia - in 2007, the Indians were a 96 win ALCS team. Then they traded their ace instead of signing him to market value. In subsequent years they spent that money on "value" FAs who turned out to be crap. Meanwhile CC stayed elite for 5 years after trading him.

IMO, the Indians, despite their struggles in the first half of 2008, could easily have stayed elite with Sabathia and Lee (who wasn't a free agent until 2012) leading their staff with their offense for years after that 2007 season - and it's not like they just ate that available payroll - they spread it around on other 2nd tier FAs because they though it was a better idea.

But the biggest argument for Pillar as leadoff hitter is Pillar's own character and personality. He seems to respond to challenges. He has an incredible work ethic and a hunger to improve. He wants the leadoff job. He'll be under pressure to prove that he can do it. He has responded to this kind of pressure in the past. I like the fact that the Jays are willing to challenge him. They're giving him a new challenge: get on base. This will require him to improve his career OBP numbers, but who's to say that he cannot improve? Nobody has won by betting against Pillar's career trajectory in the past. He's got a chip on his shoulder, a desire to prove the critics wrong. So let's see if he can do it. It's also good for team morale -- it sends a message that those who desire a tough new challenge can be allowed to have it. (Unfortunately that's a message that could be contradicted if Sanchez is sent to the bullpen, but that's a separate debate.)

His personality is also going to be his own worst enemy in that he's stubborn.

I was listening to a discussion about him on the radio and the focus was on whether he could adapt an approach that would improve his 4.5% walk rate from last season. Those watching him in Florida were surprised to hear him double-down on his "I'm up there to get hits and Josh will help me get more" mentality. He's subsequently gone out and walked twice in 33 ABs. Yeah, sample size is small but the point is he's not even trying to draw walks.

We'll see. For now, I can't reconcile Pillar as being the player gifted the most ABs in this lineup.

"The anger that Shapiro won't sign 2 mid 30's sluggers to long term deals at over $15 mil a year (probably over $20 mil is being asked) seems funny to an older fan like myself."

I'm not even really angry about that. I never thought we'd re-sign both of them. Much more upset that we didn't even consider signing a 30yr old Cy contender who wanted to play here.

I'm just annoyed that the rug has been pulled out from under us the instant we finally became a good team. It's the collective instant dismissal of so many key parts already - AA, Price, EE, Bautista - that seems so insane to me after decades of futility.

It's just imo a gargantuan underappreciation of how hard and rare it is to put together a team this good - and something that seems to be a clear echo of both our 2 decades of futility and of cleveland's permanent place in purgatory.

Even worse it seems like they're almost trying to piss off the team even this year, which makes no sense at all.

This team is awesome. Pissing away this awesomeness so that we have payroll flexibility in future years when we almost certainly will not be awesome really does upset me.

Personally I doubt Phillies' fans would trade the last decade's up and downs in exchange for constant mediocrity.

But whatever, this season should be great. Maybe Shapiro will get lucky and AA's team will win a world series and give him cover to follow his philosophy in peace.

I'll try my best to bite my tongue going forward since y'all have had about enough of me this offseason.

1. There are marginal players who put up Kevin Pillar-2015 type seasons and then fade into obscurity after that. Off the top of my head, guys like Peter Bourjos, Cameron Maybin, Juan Lagares (though he can still rebound), etc. Having a peak of a 4 WAR behind defense/speed for one season and having four consecutive seasons like that (peaking at a 6+ WAR) is a bit different. The Indians have always been a sabermetric organization with Shapiro (hence why they immediately signed Yan Gomes to a long-term deal when they saw his defense/framing numbers). They guessed wrong on Bourn obviously, but it's not like he had one season like that and the Indians signed him. Four years is a pretty big sample.

2. The Indians were 14 games under .500 when they traded Sabathia so there was no reason to keep him that season, and they were not going to be able to afford him after 2008. I'm sure they would have taken another run with Sabathia and Lee in 2009 if they could afford it, but they couldn't. If you think Rogers puts cuffs on the Jays as far as payroll, magnify that by 10 with the Indians. They had no chance of signing Sabathia.

But I'm not sure that's true. Instead of signing sabathia they spread almost all that money out on the likes of Kerry Wood, Luis Vizcaino, and Mark DeRosa, who ended up being pretty much useless.

It's just imo a gargantuan underappreciation of how hard and rare it is to put together a team this good

But... building the team isn't the hard part. The Marlins have done it twice! The tricky part is KEEPING the team together. When you have two premium sluggers whose contracts are about to expire, and instead of trying to figure out how you're either going to come up with the budget to extend one/both you bring in MORE payroll commitments, it really doesn't seem like the previous regime had any intention of being able to keep this team together either.

http://toronto.locals.baseballprospectus.com/2016/03/21/ross-atkins-interview-john-gibbons-dalton-pompey-pitching/?utm_content=bufferccf7d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

good article detailing some of the XM spring training blue jays episode last night, including Gibbons' contract adjustment and other stuff.

"The tricky part is KEEPING the team together. When you have two premium sluggers whose contracts are about to expire, and instead of trying to figure out how you're either going to come up with the budget to extend one/both you bring in MORE payroll commitments, it really doesn't seem like the previous regime had any intention of being able to keep this team together either."

The previous regime left us with only $40m in committments for 2017.

"....I'll try my best to bite my tongue going forward since y'all have had about enough of me this offseason...."

Please don't bite your tongue.  Whether we agree with all of your opinions or not, you're providing good data and provocative arguments.

statdoodling at luch....

Last 2 years stats of AL East current active rosters:

Total:

TOR: 10998pa, 115wrc+, 58.6 + 2683.0ip, 95era-, (27.6fwar, 35.5rwar), 31.6awar = 90.2
BOS: 10553pa, 102wrc+, 40.6 + 2742.0ip, 95era-, (37.4fwar, 35.6rwar), 36.5awar = 77.1
TBR: 11285pa, 104wrc+, 45.4 + 2268.1ip, 95era-, (27.4fwar, 31.2rwar), 29.3awar = 74.7
NYY: 11089pa, 102wrc+, 41.2 + 1932.0ip, 90era-, (32.9fwar, 33.7rwar), 33.3awar = 74.5
BAL: 9857pa, 98wrc+, 33.9 + 2816.2ip, 93era-, (29.2fwar, 40.3rwar), 34.8awar = 68.7

Pace (based on MLB total pa/ip per year divided by 30 teams):

TOR: 6126pa, 32.6 + 1450ip, 17.1 = 49.7
NYY: 6126pa, 22.8 + 1450ip, 25.0 = 47.8
TBR: 6126pa, 24.7 + 1450ip, 18.7 = 43.4
BOS: 6126pa, 23.6 + 1450ip, 19.3 = 42.9
BAL: 6126pa, 21.1 + 1450ip, 17.9 = 39.0

While S/A are taking a PR hit, it would be interesting to know how AA would be dealing with things were he here. And I don't know that it would be much different.

He might have at least kicked the tires on Price, but would he have offered him such a long contract?

Both Bautista and Encarnacion have been underpaid (though no one held them at gunpoint to make them sign their contracts) and are simultaneously looking for some backpay, even if they say otherwise, and of course to dip into the huge trough of free agency money. It is certainly their prerogative to ask for more years and money than an actuarial table might suggest they are truly worth, but I wonder how AA would deal with such requests? How would it be any different than S/A?

I think Chuck is dead on there. AA would've made an offer of some kind to Price but odds are it would've been around 6 years and no player opt-out. Same with Bautista and EE - AA was smart enough not to give in to whatever their demands are right now. I can't blame either of them for pushing for mega bucks/years at this point as they hold all the leverage with a take it or risk losing via free agency.

I think the big question for S/A is who replaces the guys they'll lose this winter? OF: Pompey/Alford both could be ready next year with Vlad Jr trying for 2018 but 2020 is more realistic for him. 1B/DH: Already have Colabello with Tellez trying to climb fast. 3B/SS/2B and a backup (Donaldson/Tulo/Travis/Goins) are set for a few years, as is CF (Pillar) and CA (Martin). That puts the Jays in a good position for 2016/17/18 with Donaldson an issue after that. Martin signed through 2019, Tulo 2021.

I can easily see why S/A are in no rush to resign Bautista/EE as both are now luxuries on this club and while keeping one or the other would be nice there could easily be a roster crunch if both are kept. I'd let both go to free agency at this point unless one gives in and signs a deal that suits the Jays (3 years)

If CC Sabathia's last 3 seasons + 30m remaining isn't enough to convince somebody that long term contracts that cover a pitcher's mid 30s are a horrendous idea, nothing can.

I look forward to reading the CC-related stories out of New York this summer; if he doesn't spend 45 days on the DL this year or end the season on it, NYY is on the hook for another 25m next year, so you can be sure it's going to be a circus if he isn't pitching up to par. Even the mighty Yankees have had their ability to spend curtailed by contracts like Sabathia's.

I wouldn't want the Jays to offer 3/75 to Encarnacion today, that's too large an extension for a 33 year old DH who plays 140 games a year.

That's the type of offer I can see Edwin deserving if he's healthy and productive in 2016, though.

The expiring CBA is lurking in the background of all these issues. What will next year's luxury tax threshold and penalties be? Anyone want to take a guess?

CC's extension was a mistake, but I would have been ecstatic to get his production on his original 7 year free agent deal:

5.9war
5.1
6.4
4.7
2.6
0.1
1.2

That is a very good signing.

Sure, but you don't know which you're going to get when you sign 'em. You might get Sabathia #1, or you might get Sabathia #2 (who has dramatically underperformed his fip his last few years, even as the Yankees were sporting better bullpens and defense). Grienke vs Cain (who was paid at an elite level, rightly or wrongly). Verlander. Santana. There are scads of other examples on both sides of the ledger, but elite contracts are just like any contract - with both risk and potential reward. A bust on an elite contract can really cut down on a teams' wiggle room, though.

Price is a rare one, though. There's always risk but I'm not sure there's a less risky one than him. Super clean delivery, absolutely consistent track record, proven at the top of a rotation in the toughest division ever, extremely healthy with a dedication to fitness, a great work ethic and a natural leader....just checks all the boxes. His arm could blow up tommorrow of course but man he doesn't have many question marks otherwise. Even a studly horse like CC had massive fitness question marks on him. And I don't think I'd have even wanted us to sign Greinke - imo a few too many question marks about him being able to perform in the toughest division and be a true team lynchpin instead of the sidekick to the best pitcher in baseball (though looking at his numbers now maybe I exaggerate his question marks a bit). Still, though - very few guys I'd want to gamble on like that. Price is one of them.

anywyas I promised I'd bite my tongue.

As far as "opt-out" clauses: if they're not a big deal, then make them a 2-way opt-out.
Either, BOTH the player and the team have to agree (I guess this could already be done - tear up an existing contract, so nothing new here), or EITHER SIDE can opt-out at the set point.

So, if after 3 years, you've gotten 2x the WAR from the player, opt out of the contract and sign a younger player.. Odds are the $/WAR won't be as good the 2nd half. Or, instead of a full opt-out, let the team instead choose to cut the remaining contract value in half, and if they do, the player can still choose to opt out.

e.g. David Price signs for $7x30 (just to make the numbers easy), and an opt-out after 3. If, after 3 years, he's killing it, he'll opt-out. If he's been injured non-stop, either party can opt-out (scenario 1), or reduce the contract to 4x$15 (to reduce the hit) (scenario 2). In scenario 2, Price can choose to opt-out after the team chooses to cut the contract in half.

That's essentially giving the team some of the safety of the opt-out the player gets: if he undervalued himself (or no one wanted to pony up), he opts out and gets even more. How does the team get compensated in the case where they super overpaid (like Michael Bourn, for example)? In the case of a player who fell off a cliff, he might choose to still play out the contract for half the $$ - 50% is better than nothing. Which would make it much easier to swallow for the team and the fans, IMHO. Imagine if Vernon was only getting $10M for those last 3-4 years? Not such an albatross after all.

Of course, this is only if the player WANTS an opt-out. If the player is fine with a straight-up contract for x years, the team gets no opt-out either.. Watch how fast opt-outs disappear if the risk is shared...

On losing EdWing and his Bash Brother EE. They are GOING TO BE MISSED - ABSOLUTELY.

Pity. However we do get 2 draft picks between the first and second round in the 2017 draft. Slow Clap...

For better or worse the one internal fix is for the one of Colabello or Smoak, whichever was riding the bench in 16 while the other was on the field, will be the DH while the other is the first baseman in 2017. That replaces EE. (Obviously, it's a big hit production wise...). Might the Mighty Rowdy challenge at first or DH? Internally, it looks (to these old eyes) like Lake is the heir apparent to Bautista's RF gig. OR perhaps Pompey or Alford.

IF - they can sign, or TRADE FOR, in the off season next winter - ONE serious offensive/defensive RFer - THEN - the world does not actually end. Unless of course Putin pissed off the Donald - in which case all bets are off! Perhaps - after the season they can get a deal with Bautista, sigh...

Just remember that: Travis, Donaldson, Tulo, Colabello, Saunders, Martin, Smoak, Lake and Pillar would STILL be a reasonably formidable lineup. Replace Lake with a serious guy in a trade or free agency signing and it becomes a seriously, serious lineup. Seriously...

Travis, Donaldson, Tulo, Colabello, Saunders, Martin, Smoak, Lake and Pillar would STILL be a reasonably formidable lineup.

Not sure what's speaking here, the wee dram or the spring-tinged optimism. That lineup looks downright middling, no more.

Typically a team doesn't get an opt out. It gets a buy back. They Jays have used those a lot. AA even traded for a guy just to buy back his last year and get an extra pick.

Interesting quote in sportsnet article today from an NL scout who says Sanchez's stuff is the best he's seen in ST this year and that the Jays would be crazy to put him in the bullpen.

I wouldn't want the Jays to offer 3/75 to Encarnacion today, that's too large an extension for a 33 year old DH who plays 140 games a year.

That is a reasonable point of view.  Encarnacion has however split his time almost evenly between DH and first base over the last 4 years.  I think that he would have probably stayed a little healthier had they let him DH all the time. 

He'd be 34 in the first year of the extension and expecting any more than 140 games a year average from a 34-36 year old DH isn't really reasonable.  The clock is merciless.

For better or worse the one internal fix is for the one of Colabello or Smoak, whichever was riding the bench in 16 while the other was on the field, will be the DH while the other is the first baseman in 2017.

Smoak is a free agent after this year. Cola is 30 and has 4 years of arbitration left, wouldn't even cost 1M next year.

IF - they can sign, or TRADE FOR, in the off season next winter - ONE serious offensive/defensive RFer - THEN - the world does not actually end.

I think they go for defense in the outfield. Pompei, Ceciliani, Lake, eventually Alford. They just need good bats at 1B/DH.

Travis being healthy and raking would help a lot.

Just remember that Saunders is also a free agent. If he has a good year, I'd offer a QO, but there's no way I'd sign Saunders for more than 2 years. I'd sign EE and Bautista long before that.

Sanchez has innings limit. It would be crazy to put him there for 200 innings.

Option 1. Start in Toronto rotation until he gets shutdown in August.
Option 2. Start in Toronto rotation until he moves to the pen.
Option 3. Start in Buffalo until he moves to Toronto.
Option 4. Start in the pen and move to the rotation as soon as a starter is needed.

Anyone got any qualitative reasons to think Encarnacion will age well as a hitter?

Sanchez is good for somewhere around 160-180 innings at least.

If he pitches well enough to average 6ip/gs - no mean feat for a rook - all they have to do is skip him in the rotation a handful of times to keep him in a good range.

Sanchez is good for somewhere around 160-180 innings at least.
If he pitches well enough to average 6ip/gs - no mean feat for a rook - all they have to do is skip him in the rotation a handful of times to keep him in a good range.

Totally agree with this post and with the NL scout mentioned above. I have been in Florida for 10 days sitting directly behind home plate and Sanchez was amazing - effortless 97 moving fastball, good curve, occasional change. Floyd seems to be Shapiro's guy, though, and I am not confident that Shapiro will pick the better pitcher here. By the way, unlike other years when AA was very visible in the spring, Shapiro and Atkins have not appeared in public or anywhere near the fans.

Would having Sanchez up but skipping starts just waste his service time? Would you do that even if that means losing him a year earlier? At this point Floyd could produce a similar output basically for free. You'd probably need a spot starter to pick up the slack of skipping Sanchez and that might squeeze a useful arm out of the roster.

I'll just say whatever they choose it won't please everyone and it will have to be looked at in hindsight later.

Would having Sanchez up but skipping starts just waste his service time?

Isn't the goal to win the World Series this year?

At this point Floyd could produce a similar output basically for free.

Let's see Floyd get through April first before making any pronouncements on what he is capable of.

Anyone got any qualitative reasons to think Encarnacion will age well as a hitter?

He drinks the blood of Paul Molitor.

we're only talking like 3-4 skipped starts.

28 starts at 6ip each is 168ip which should be well within innings limits. And that's if he's healthy the whole time - 28 starts isn't that easy a mark to reach anywyas.

I like Floyd too. But if Sanchez is better we have to try to use our best. Sanchez and Floyd might both be amongst our top 5 starters, though.

Looking at Edwin's top-10 BBRef comparables does the opposite - makes me think he'll be done soon. Only 2/10 had any kind of consistency after age 31 (consistency, I'm arbitrarily defining as 3/4 "good" seasons, where "good" is 2+ WAR). Frank Howard and Tim Salmon. Only one other (Jermaine Dye) had ANY single 2+ WAR season after 33. And JD's followed a negative WAR season (with 500+ PA) which mostly cancelled his good season.
Some comparables to Edwin:Danny Tartabull, Roger Maris (maybe a "*"?), Pat Burrell, Eric Chavez, oh yeah - and Joe Carter and Jesse Barfield.

Lots of those sit in my mind as "guys who were good early, but fell off a cliff in their early 30s".

3/75 MIGHT work - but that's what - 9 WAR over 3 years? ONLY Frank Howard managed that from age 32-34 (WAR of 11 or 12). After 34, he was done too.
So even 3/75 seems like a risk, or the outside of what we should offer. 5 years? No way, unless it's 5/75.

I think Edwin will continue to produce the next few years, but I'm not optimistic at all that he'll stay healthy. I would guess in 2 or three years we'd be lucky to get 100 games out of him in a season.

http://www.tsn.ca/mlb/video/price-talks-all-things-toronto-with-phillips~833161

Regarding the question posed earlier about who replaces the impending FA's next season, Pompey replacing Saunders is the only real safe bet at this point, IMO. This FO will likely be way more conservative with promoting prospects than the previous regime was, so expecting some of the top prospects currently in A+ to become 2017 options for the big league club is probably a long shot (though not impossible).

The free agent market looks pretty barren for next season. They can probably get away with a Moss/Lind/Alvarez/Pearce type at DH/1B on a short-term deal, but replacing Bautista will be a lot more difficult. Unless Jay Bruce has a bounce back offensive season, he's not the answer (and if he does bounce back, it will take more to acquire him).

Next off-season will be one of the more interesting ones in recent memory. It could go any number of directions. I'd rather just enjoy 2016 first, though. Worry about 2017 in November.

I do have qualitative reasons for thinking that Encarnacion will age better than most of his forebears.  When I searched for comps for Bautista, I noticed that the good overall hitters (plate control, contact ability and power) who were able to make the conversion to DH aged better than others.  Most hitters have "the DH penalty"- hitting about 5% worse as a DH.  Not Encarnacion.   He seems to be utterly content as a DH and his production there reflects it. 

I actually like Encarnacion's chances of aging better at 34-36 than Bautista's chances at 36-38.  I realize that I am probably in a minority on that point, but I think that Encarnacion is likely to be healthier.  I worry about Bautista's pride and his conversion to diminished defensive responsibilities.  I don't think that it will be smooth. 

I think their age/injury risk is pretty similar....but I might tend towards Bautista being healthier. He's more of a fitness freak than EE is I think, and has managed to be healthier than EE even though he's had more defensive demands on him. EE's injuries also worry me a bit more - his back/core injuries seem to be the more typical age-related injury issues than Bautista's more specific action-related injuries have been.

But it's very close.

I also am old school enough to believe in chemistry and psychological factors in sports - and let's face it, no matter how good Donaldson or ee or tulo are, Bautista is the man in this lineup. He's the one who puts the fear of god in the opposition, and who the others in the lineup emulate (heck all of donaldson EE and Tulo have literally changed their swings to copy Jose) . He's the Michael Jordan IMO. I can't dismiss that.

Love EE but he's clearly a Pippen, imo.

"This FO will likely be way more conservative with promoting prospects than the previous regime was, so expecting some of the top prospects currently in A+ to become 2017 options for the big league club is probably a long shot (though not impossible). "

I know you think AA was a madman with prospect promotion but shapiro's history in Cleveland shows no hesitancy to stick 21/22yr olds with minimal high minors experience onto the team.

as for AA's outside the box thinking on using elite starting prospects in low minors as mlb bullpen candidates.....note that according to Pete Walker yesterday, there has been zero discussion of sending sanchez or osuna to the minors.

Pippen was awfully good at ages 34 and 35, while Jordan had already declined by age 34 and was out of basketball from 35-37. 

There have been lots of players who projected fear.  Jim Rice and Harmon Killebrew are two names that come to mind immediately.  I don't know that that has much to do with aging curves.  I agree however that Bautista's fitness fanaticism is a positive marker, but the same over-the-top tenacity that propels him is also something that needs to be controlled.   I haven't been watching the spring training games- how has he been throwing? 

Due to AA's "outside the box thinking" (is that a nice way of saying crazy?), Osuna has a career high 70 innings all as a reliever and he himself is afraid of starting due to his elbow. The fact that demoting him would also hurt the bullpen in a year they want to compete makes the whole process pointless unless they found a bullpen replacement for him (which they don't have currently). As far as Sanchez, demoting him would make sense if they wanted to keep him stretched out, but he also has an innings restriction which will either force him to start the season in the bullpen before transitioning to the rotation or start in the rotation and move to the pen mid-season again. There's really no right answer here unless they are willing to let him spend an entire season in the minors, which they won't, or an entire season in the bullpen, which wouldn't be terrible, but not good for his development. If he's in the bigs in 2016, it should be in the bullpen. Outside of 10-15 innings this spring, he hasn't shown anything yet to suggest he'll be a MLB starter, dating back to 2010.

I'm not exactly sure what you were responding to or what you were disagreeing with, to be honest. I'm saying that Alford, Greene, etc, are long shots to be counted on in 2017. Not impossible, especially if their performance warrants it, but long shots. A lot has to go right for them. I think Shapiro/Atkins will probably go with stop-gaps in that scenario and let the prospects force their way on, rather than count on them from the start (see Saunders vs. Pompey). I'm not sure I'm taking a huge gamble by saying that.

I haven't noticed any of Bautista's throws. The bat speed is absolutely still there...

I am optimistic. Like Mylegacy.

I see our young pitching helping this team survive in 2017 and the next 2 years. Sanchez and Osuna are good major league pitchers.
If they cannot cut it as starters, then they are 2 top end relievers.
Stroman and Hutch are both young. 2016 will hopefully show us how good they are or can be, as starters. They will have to be judged on their results.

Our defense can be good to very good in that 2017+ time period. Goins and his type do not take any team into the post season. I say that as 99% fact. I am also hoping that someone will crunch numbers or use some other method to prove how valuable defense is.

For example how many spots in the batting order do you use on defense. Jeff Mathis is an example of using 1 spot and your offense should still be good.

heh good point Mike - my Jordan/pippen anology doesn't make jose a better bet going forward. But I do think he's more important to the lineup despite the similar stats. the health/aging is a seperate issue.

"Due to AA's "outside the box thinking" (is that a nice way of saying crazy?),"

Well....I could be more accurate and call it his "wildly successful strategy"? sound good?

Lott has an article coming out quoting Osuna saying he doesn't even want to start next year, even though the team wants him to.

In this case imo the team has to step in and make him see the light. This doesn't make sense for his career, or for the team.

"I'm not exactly sure what you were responding to or what you were disagreeing with, to be honest. I'm saying that Alford, Greene, etc, are long shots to be counted on in 2017."

Both will be 22 next year with likely over a full season of high minors ball under their belts. Based on Shapiro's history in Cleveland, I don't think he'd hesitate to put them in the majors if he feels they can contribute.

Amusing that in the span of two back-to-back posts, uglyone goes from repudiating SK in NJ's argument to completely affirming it.  "Wildly successful strategy", indeed.

Out of curiosity since this is definitely one of my blind spots and it's probably one reason people are talking past each other so much on the whole Sanchez issue:

What's the most up-to-date public research on keeping pitchers' arms healthy? Why are we so fond of increasing yearly IP totals in small increments? Why do we have innings limits at all? What's the best evidence that they've worked?

"....Due to AA's 'outside the box thinking' (is that a nice way of saying crazy?), Osuna has a career high 70 innings all as a reliever and he himself is afraid of starting due to his elbow..."

A lot of weird stuff gets blamed on Anthopoulos, but this takes the cake.  Osuna is "afraid of starting" and this is "due to AA"??  So somehow Anthopoulos got into Osuna's head and made him a frightened person who is incapable of starting??  How the heck can this alleged psychological deformity be blamed on Anthopoulos, if this over-simplified allegation is even true?

"....As far as Sanchez, demoting him would make sense if they wanted to keep him stretched out, but he also has an innings restriction which will either force him to start the season in the bullpen before transitioning to the rotation or start in the rotation and move to the pen mid-season again..."

This too is incorrect, as uglyone pointed out above.  There's nothing preventing Sanchez from increasing his innings to 160 to 180 this season, and his innings can easily be managed by having him skip a couple of starts if necessary.  If Floyd is in the bullpen, he'll be happy to have a few spot starts, and Hutchison and Chavez are equally capable of stepping in for a couple of starts.  It wouldn't hurt the Jays at all.

In sum, you're imagining a crisis where none exists.  You're making a mountain out of a molehill.  Sanchez doesn't need to be demoted, and he won't be "forced" to start the season in the bullpen or to switch back to the bullpen in mid-season.  This is not a huge problem for the Jays.  In fact they're in an incredibly enviable position, with 4 pitchers available for the 5th spot in the rotation.  With those 4 pitchers available, there are many ways to juggle the pitchers and the innings to make everything work out fine.

Jays lighting up Norris in the 1st. Another dinger for Tulo. only guy to make an out so far is pillar (how many times will we say that this year?). Norris having a rough spring so far.

"What's the most up-to-date public research on keeping pitchers' arms healthy? Why are we so fond of increasing yearly IP totals in small increments? Why do we have innings limits at all? What's the best evidence that they've worked? "

as far as I know, most maybe all of the theories of pitch limits and 30-inning yearly increases have been debunked.

"Amusing that in the span of two back-to-back posts, uglyone goes from repudiating SK in NJ's argument to completely affirming it. "Wildly successful strategy", indeed."

well, I assumed nobody was seriously saying Osuna's unwillingness to start was a result of this strategy.

"Amusing that in the span of two back-to-back posts, uglyone goes from repudiating SK in NJ's argument to completely affirming it. "Wildly successful strategy", indeed."


Glad I'm not the only one who caught that. Keeping Osuna in the pen doesn't make sense for his career, but putting him there in the first place straight out of A-Ball at age 20 with 40 IP in his arm instead of letting him develop in the minors as a SP was 'wildly successful'.

oh you were being serious.

"A lot of weird stuff gets blamed on Anthopoulos, but this takes the cake. Osuna is "afraid of starting" and this is "due to AA"?? So somehow Anthopoulos got into Osuna's head and made him a frightened person who is incapable of starting?? How the heck can this alleged psychological deformity be blamed on Anthopoulos, if this over-simplified allegation is even true?"


Where exactly did you come to that twisted conclusion? When did I say Osuna was afraid to start because of AA? I said that in passing after mentioning his lack of innings. It had nothing to do with AA. Osuna himself said he doesn't want to start in 2016 because of fear of his elbow. That's the surgery's fault, if you want to blame anything for Osuna's fear. Why he doesn't want to start in 2017 is a different story.


"This too is incorrect, as uglyone pointed out above. There's nothing preventing Sanchez from increasing his innings to 160 to 180 this season, and his innings can easily be managed by having him skip a couple of starts if necessary. If Floyd is in the bullpen, he'll be happy to have a few spot starts, and Hutchison and Chavez are equally capable of stepping in for a couple of starts. It wouldn't hurt the Jays at all."


Teams usually err on the side of caution when increasing a pitcher's workload. Going from 100 to 180 (like you are suggesting) is a big jump, especially when 59 of his last 125 innings have come as a reliever. It's just not realistic for someone his age.

Sure, if you want to push caution aside and let him start every 5th day, innings limit be damned, then that's one way of doing things. Not something many teams would agree with, I'm sure.

Starting him in the pen helps the 2016 team. Probably not much since his role will be reduced with Storen on board, but if their goal is to win in 2016, then Floyd/Chavez/Hutchison should have priority over the 5th spot over Sanchez. Look, I hope Sanchez becomes even half as good as some of you already think he is. I'd rather be wrong about him and see the Jays benefit. However, 10-15 ST innings does not supersede his entire pro career so far. Let's give him time to prove he's turned the corner before limiting the roles of other, possibly better, candidates.

"oh you were being serious."


You just got done defending AA for using a 20-year old out of A-ball as a reliever before he even had 50 innings as a starter in the minors, and then five minutes later said you hope the team comes to its sense by making him a starter because being a reliever "doesn't make sense for his career, or for the team." If it doesn't make sense for his career, then why did they stunt his development as a SP to do it in the first place? Second question, why were you defending said action if you thought it wasn't in his best interest?

I know you like AA, but call a spade a spade here.

The decision to use Osuna and Sanchez in the pen, and them both being dominant relievers on a world series contender, was wildly successful, no doubt about that.

unless you can walk me through how this was a cause of Osuna's hesitancy to start.

"However, 10-15 ST innings does not supersede his entire pro career so far."

It does not, nor does continually repeating this line negate the progress Sanchez demonstrated in his last 6 starts before suffering his injury last season. Now, those 40+ innings are by no means definitive but nor should they be willfully ignored.

"....Going from 100 to 180 (like you are suggesting) is a big jump...."

Obviously I didn't suggest that, and it would take quite a deliberate misreading to imagine that.  Sanchez pitched 133 innings in 2014.  It was only because of injury that he pitched 100 innings last year.  To go from 133 innings in 2014 to a new target of 160 to 180 innings this season as I suggested, and as uglyone suggested, should not be an insurmountable problem.  Teams have abandoned the old rigid formulas about innings limits and gradual increases in workloads.

"...if their goal is to win in 2016, then Floyd/Chavez/Hutchison should have priority over the 5th spot over Sanchez..."

I'd love to know more about your crystal ball and why you're so supremely confident in it. Your crystal ball is telling you, with absolute certainty, that Sanchez is the WORST of those four potential starters and will perform the WORST of those four potential starters in the rotation this season. I mean, sure, you're entitled to your opinions, but you're insisting that all three of Floyd, Chavez and Hutchison "should have priority" over Sanchez as if this is some confirmed certainty.  It's just your guess, and a very dubious one in my opinion. 

"...When did I say Osuna was afraid to start because of AA?..."

It's a fairly logical conclusion from this sentence, which I quote in its entirety:  "Due to AA's 'outside the box thinking' (is that a nice way of saying crazy?), Osuna has a career high 70 innings all as a reliever and he himself is afraid of starting due to his elbow."
If you make 2 assertions and preface both of them with a clause that says those assertions are "due to AA...", then your sentence has only one logical conclusion.

"....the progress Sanchez demonstrated in his last 6 starts before suffering his injury.... those 40+ innings are by no means definitive but nor should they be willfully ignored...."

I agree with this.  His last 6 starts in the rotation last season, plus his spring performance this year, gives plenty of reason for optimism about his likely performance this year, and have to be factored heavily in the equation, even though other factors must be considered too.

"The decision to use Osuna and Sanchez in the pen, and them both being dominant relievers on a world series contender, was wildly successful, no doubt about that.

unless you can walk me through how this was a cause of Osuna's hesitancy to start."


No one is questioning that Osuna had a very good season in 2015. The question is why do it in the first place?

Regardless, what's done is done. Going to the next point about whether Osuna should be a starter, look at his IP totals.

2011: 19.2 IP (MEX)
2012: 43.2 IP (RK/A-)
2013: 42.1 IP, (A)
2014: 35.1 IP (RK/A+/AZFL)
2015: 78.0 IP (MLB + playoffs)

If he threw a similar amount of innings out of the pen in 2016 (around 80), how likely was it that he was going to be ready for a SP workload in 2017? Shapiro doesn't even think Sanchez can handle a SP workload, and he at least has 100 IP as a starter. Once Osuna became a good reliever, it was always a long shot that he was going to be a starter again. They could have tried, and maybe they still will, but that transition is a lot harder than the opposite. The Jays did not do Osuna and Castro any favors last year. Although in hindsight, if Osuna prefers being a reliever, I'm sure he's fine with how things ended up.

"No one is questioning that Osuna had a very good season in 2015. The question is why do it in the first place?"

Your first sentence answers the second.

"It does not, nor does continually repeating this line negate the progress Sanchez demonstrated in his last 6 starts before suffering his injury last season. Now, those 40+ innings are by no means definitive but nor should they be willfully ignored."


Those 40 innings involved a 4.78 FIP and 17/21 BB/K ratio. If that was a sign of him turning the corner, that's not good.

Again, he could end up being a good starter. He just hasn't shown signs of it yet. In 2016, we should not be looking strictly at ERA as a be all end all, especially when there is so much more info available to us.

"....Shapiro doesn't even think Sanchez can handle a SP workload..."

Such a bizarre conclusion for you to reach -- and a complete exaggeration of what Shapiro actually said.  Shapiro has merely pointed out that Sanchez has a career high of 130 innings in a season. He never said that Sanchez can't increase his workload beyond 130 innings.  He said nothing to support your weird conclusion that he "doesn't even think Sanchez can handle a SP workload."  You're so determined to oppose the Sanchez-as-starter scenario that you're inventing stuff that never happened.

"....Osuna has a career high 70 innings all as a reliever and he himself is afraid of starting due to his elbow...."

The full text of John Lott's interview with Osuna has now been posted, and there's nothing in the interview to suggest that Osuna is "afraid of starting."  Once again, you've made a gross exaggeration.  I'm appending the relevant text below.  You'll see that Osuna is merely expressing a personal preference for being a closer, rather than a starter.  And he's making the obvious point that he can't go from 70 innings to 200 innings -- which absolutely everyone agrees with.  Nobody has ever suggested that he would step into the rotation in 2017 and pitch 180 or 200 innings.  There would be a "plan" to manage his innings as a starter -- as Osuna himself confirms.  So, while he has a personal preference for being a closer rather than a starter, he's never saying anything to suggest that he is "afraid" of being a starter.  Here is the full text of the relevant portion of the Lott interview with Osuna, and readers can reach their own conclusions:

"Obviously we'd have to make a plan for me," he says. "I don't think I'd be able to pitch 200 innings... If they want me to be a starter they will have to understand that. You know, take it easy a bit. Obviously I want to be a reliever this year.

"But that's my plan for next year, be a starter."

The word my in that last sentence might have been a rare slip of Osuna's tongue. I ask whether he says he expects to become a starter because that's his plan, or because he believes that's what the Jays want him to do.

"You're right," he replies, "it's because they want me as a starter. But if I would have the choice, I would stay in the bullpen, especially next year when we won't have probably [Drew] Storen or [Brett] Cecil, so I probably have the chance to be the closer. I would take the closer over starter."

John Lott wrote a thoughtful piece on the Sanchez role decision yesterday.  It is unfortunate that it is probably an either/or proposition.  I remember Kelvim Escobar getting some nice long outings in relief during his major league transition to the rotation.  Not that it helped him make it.

In one sense, Osuna's desire to remain in the bullpen and Sanchez' desire to move to the rotation may play into the decision. The bullpen is the safer play and gambling on one may involve more tolerable risk.

let's not rewrite history on Sanchez' "entire pro career so far", either.

A (20): 90.1ip, 2.49era, 3.57fip - excellent, age appropriate
A+ (20): 86.1ip, 3.34era, 3.67fip - very good, 1yr young
AA (21): 66.0ip, 3.82era, 4.16fip - decent, 1yr young
AAA (21): 36.1ip, 4.19era, 4.87fip - poor, 2yrs young
MLB RP (21-22): 59.1ip, 1.67era, 2.93fip - excellent, 2-3yrsY
MLB as SP (22): 66.0ip, 3.55era, 5.21fip - decent, 2yrsY

His track record is not exactly weak.

Smoak and Saunders getting in on the fun now. 7-1 and counting. Our lineup is truly awesome. Even without EE and Travis.

"Obviously I didn't suggest that, and it would take quite a deliberate misreading to imagine that. Sanchez pitched 133 innings in 2014. It was only because of injury that he pitched 100 innings last year. To go from 133 innings in 2014 to a new target of 160 to 180 innings this season as I suggested, and as uglyone suggested, should not be an insurmountable problem. Teams have abandoned the old rigid formulas about innings limits and gradual increases in workloads."


Sanchez threw 100 IP as a starter in 2014, then 33 as a reliever to end that season, then 66 as a SP in 2015, and another 33 IP as a reliever counting the playoffs. You are assuming all innings are identical because it suits your argument. That's not reality. Your use of the word rigid is wrong here as well because when did anyone place a number on the innings Sanchez could pitch? All that was said was a full season as a SP would be a huge jump. There would have to be a level of caution shown.


================================================

"I'd love to know more about your crystal ball and why you're so supremely confident in it. Your crystal ball is telling you, with absolute certainty, that Sanchez is the WORST of those four potential starters and will perform the WORST of those four potential starters in the rotation this season. I mean, sure, you're entitled to your opinions, but you're insisting that all three of Floyd, Chavez and Hutchison "should have priority" over Sanchez as if this is some confirmed certainty. It's just your guess, and a very dubious one in my opinion."


I don't think it needs to be expanded since it's common sense, but track record is the reason. Sure, Sanchez could out-pitch them, but it would take him pitching like he's never pitched before in his pro career. You don't bet on the long shot, you bet on the sure thing. If the long shot happens to become the sure thing over time, then you change course.

Although, I'd love to argue with ugly that Happ could out-pitch Price in 2016. Since he doesn't have a crystal ball, there's no way of knowing for sure. Will you agree to have my back on that one?


================================================

"It's a fairly logical conclusion from this sentence"


You mentioned something about deliberately misreading before. It applies here. I don't know how you could even interpret it that way, even if I could have worded it differently.

"....Those 40 innings involved a 4.78 FIP and 17/21 BB/K ratio. If that was a sign of him turning the corner, that's not good..."

I don't think FIP is necessarily the best way, or only way, to measure his success in those 40 innings.  Another stat:  he held the opposition to an OPS of just .695 in those 40 innings. That's good.

ChinaFan, responding to you is an absolute chore. You take one line of a quote, completely mis-interpret it, and then go off on a tangent that makes absolutely no sense.

Case in point:

"Such a bizarre conclusion for you to reach -- and a complete exaggeration of what Shapiro actually said. Shapiro has merely pointed out that Sanchez has a career high of 130 innings in a season. He never said that Sanchez can't increase his workload beyond 130 innings. He said nothing to support your weird conclusion that he "doesn't even think Sanchez can handle a SP workload." You're so determined to oppose the Sanchez-as-starter scenario that you're inventing stuff that never happened."

When I did I say that Shapiro said he can't exceed 130 innings next year? A SP workload is typically around 180-200 IP. You can limit that by skipping starts, or giving extended days off, as ugly suggested, but that's what a SP workload implies. By bringing up his career high in IP, what the hell do you think Shapiro is implying? That he'll be able to topple 200 IP with no problem? There will have to be caution shown with his innings.

As far as Osuna, there was a quote a while back where he said he didn't want to start in 2016 because he didn't feel his elbow could handle it. I know your posting style, so you're going to harp on the word "scared" instead of the actual meaning, but it is what it is. He feels his elbow cannot handle the workload. He doesn't want to start. Oh wait, but I said "scared", so continue on your rambling diatribe.

I miss the David Price topics. Let's bring those back. Arguments with CF are more tedious than enjoyable.

I don't understand the suggestion that Osuna's preference for being a reliever shouldn't be tied to AA's decision to rush a 20 year old prospect arm to the majors to bolster the bullpen because he didn't have the money necessary to bring in experienced MLB relievers. Had AA not done so Osuna would've been a starter in the minors whose innings were managed last year, and that would continue into 2016. I strongly doubt Osuna would've come to the team as a prospect who had reached Dunedin and said "Let's transition me into the bullpen, I think that's better for my arm and my future".

I don't know, 92-93.  I have a recollection from Osuna's minor-league days of a quote from him indicating his comfort with relieving (as his uncle had done).  It might have been in Dunedin in 2014 after his TJ surgery. 

Personally, I think that the club is going to make the decision on Sanchez as late as possible.  It would be nice to see him throw 6 innings in his last appearance against a major league lineup (mostly).  If he looks good and is healthy afterwards, it would easier to take the leap.  It sure helps that the offence and defence will be there to support him. 

Happ could out-pitch Price in 2016. ... Will you agree to have my back on that one?

I got you here. Soon all shall witness the #Happotheosis of pitching. 3.30 ERA or better or you get a full refund for this prediction.

if osuna is that impressionable, then there's nothing to worry about - just make him a starter, and he'll suddenly like starting.

SK, every time I catch you misquoting someone to bolster your weak arguments, you go into great verbiage in lengthy posts in which you climb down and abandon the misquotes.   It's tedious, yes, but it's intended to prevent you from misleading people with your strange misquotes and factually wrong statements.  You're constantly trying to use quotes from Shapiro and various players to prove your very weak claims -- yet the quotes are simply wrong.  I'm sorry that you find it tedious, but it's necessary to correct the record.

"....He feels his elbow cannot handle the workload..."

In reality, Osuna said absolutely nothing about his elbow in connection with the 2017 season.  You can continue to misquote him, implying that his "elbow" is the reason for his preference to be a closer in 2017, but he said not a single word about it. 

Just correcting the record again.   Sorry if you find accuracy so tedious.

In 2016, we should not be looking strictly at ERA as a be all end all, especially when there is so much more info available to us.

I am not sure where ERA was referenced, but for encouraging signs I choose to look at the reduced walk rate, the average of almost 7 IP pitched, and the paucity of hard contact that was induced. Subjectively, having watched each of those starts I would be hard pressed to say that he did not look like a viable MLB starting pitcher at that point.

https://sports.vice.com/ca/article/roberto-osuna-doesnt-want-to-be-a-starting-pitcher

osuna's take on it.

Jays should let Sanchez start for 3 quarters of the year, then put him in the bullpen for the last quarter and playoffs assuming the Jays make it. This will build up his innings, and get him prepared for a full season of starting next year and provide another weapon in the bullpen late in the year.

John Lott is awesome, so happy that he's back.

CF, I'm 99% sure that I read a quote from Osuna where he did talk about just coming back from TJ as a reason that he would want to remain a reliever for 2016. TJ = elbow.

"....Jays should let Sanchez start for 3 quarters of the year, then put him in the bullpen for the last quarter and playoffs assuming the Jays make it...."

I tend to agree with this.  The Jays need to get off to a fast start, and Sanchez can help them do that.  The crucial months are the opening months of the season -- the months when they traditionally did badly (before 2015) and fell out of contention by July.  They need the best possible pitching in the early months. That means they should choose the pitchers who have looked the strongest in 2015 and in the spring of 2016, regardless of older career numbers.  There will be lots of ways to juggle the rotation in the final months of the season if they think Sanchez is getting close to his innings limit.  They could pick up an additional pitcher at the trade deadline, or promote Hutchison from Buffalo if he is looking good, or shift Floyd or Chavez from the bullpen.  Lots of ways to do it.

The next two weeks will probably answer any lingering questions about Sanchez vs Floyd.  But if one of them is clearly best, he should be in the rotation at the start of the season.  And there's nothing unusual about using the spring to determine which pitchers are best for the 5th spot in the rotation -- the Jays did exactly this in 2013 when they were trying to decide between Romero and Happ.  They didn't guarantee a rotation job to Romero, despite his better career numbers.  They went with Happ, who had out-pitched Romero in the spring.  It would be crazy to penalize Sanchez for his pre-2015 numbers if he beats Floyd and Chavez and Hutchison in the spring competition.

I find it very strange that one poster here is perceiving Sanchez as the fourth-worst of the four rivals for the final spot in the rotation.  Virtually everyone who has watched the games has been more impressed by Sanchez than anyone else. If he wins the job, let him have it.  Don't penalize him because you imagine he'll revert to the worst of his minor-league history.  There is nothing taboo about using the spring competition to settle the 5th spot in the rotation.

".... I'm 99% sure that I read a quote from Osuna where he did talk about just coming back from TJ as a reason that he would want to remain a reliever for 2016...."

Yes, he did say that, for the 2016 season.  My point was about the 2017 season.  I was refuting the claim that Osuna is "afraid" to be a starter in the long term.

"I started hearing the shooting around 4 AM, 4:30," he says. "But I didn't know it was El Chapo, right? And it's very normal in Mexico." The shooting, he meant.

Afraid is not the word you want.

He's a smart guy and he doesn't want to gamble all the money coming his way by pushing himself hard when he's making he league minimum. That makes him more of a role model than a guy who flips his bat in front of a huge crowd. If he was my son, I'd want him to stay in the pen.

I'm not sure if Sanchez is more valuable going from rotation to pen or from pen to rotation.
We don't know if he'll be better than Floyd. That sinker is great, but they might get to him the third time through the rotation when he gets tired and his other pitches aren't working.

Hutch, Floyd or Sanchez, it's all good to me. I'm not sure about Happ. Maybe if he's limited to 5 or 6 innings he can throw harder, but I'm sure Chavez is out of it now so it's all good.

In the interview, Osuna made it pretty clear that he's not motivated by fear or money -- he's primarily motivated by his personal dislike of boredom.  He hates being bored, so he doesn't like to wait several days between appearances.  His words:

"I like to be a reliever because I like to pitch very often. I would get bored if I pitch every few days. I think I'm the guy who wants to be out there every day."

This doesn't seem to be an insurmountable obstacle. If the Jays are convinced that he can help the team best by pitching in the rotation, that's where he will be.  He's not a free agent, he's a 21-year-old who will pitch where the Jays tell him to pitch. 

The link ugly provided upthread, with Price talking to Phillips about his time in Toronto, includes some very positive remarks about Sanchez and his future.  That tells me a lot.

umwitchew, ugly.  Hang in there.

Does Ceciliani appear to have already won the backup OF/ 4th OF post ? How about David Adams ? As Goins can play not just IF but the outfield, can Adams squeeze himself in as the last batter ? In other words, how Lake and Carrera can BOTH be sent to Buffalo without losing them needs brainstorming, as one previous poster spoke of. Given Ceciliani hot streak in spring training, would Ceciliani spent some time against RHSP as Pillar building up his OPS ? When Ceciliani cooled off in April, he is going to Buffalo.

In Buffalo, veteran batters like Brown, Kotchman, Carrera, Lake, Dominguez can substitute Ceciliani. Can Robinzon Diaz come up too ? 2016 season is crucial chance to make the postseason so is the idea that continuous riding any hot streak of only one unexpected hitter good ?

John Stilson and Adonys Cardona are back pitching in minor league camp.

If healthy, I could see Stilson making a contribution to the big league club later this year.

We should start a pool regarding Cardona's next injury - A reminder that prospects will break your heart.

well, ST has been going....pretty pretty good. everybody knock the crap out of any wood you come across.

update:

Jays Hitters


2B Travis ----
3B Donaldson 28ab, 4bb/5k, 0/0sb, .812ops
RF Bautista 20ab, 3bb/4k, 0/0sb, .910ops
DH En'cion ---
SS Tulowitzki 31ab, 4bb/8k, 0/0sb, 1.049ops
1B Colabello 36ab, 2bb/7k, 0/0sb, .950ops
LF Saunders 31ab, 3bb/7k, 0/0sb, 1.121ops
C Martin 25ab, 1bb/5k, 0/0sb, .591ops
CF Pillar 37ab, 2bb/1k, 0/0sb, .633ops

UT Smoak 30ab, 6bb/7k, 0/0sb, 1.178ops
OF Ceciliani* 27ab, 4bb/5k, 0/0sb, 1.172ops
IF Goins 30ab, 3bb/9k, 1/1sb, .975ops
C Thole 17ab, 0bb/3k, 0/0sb, .575ops

Bisons Hitters

CF Pompey 22ab, 2bb/7k, 0/0sb, .928ops
RF Lake 30ab, 3bb/5k, 4/4sb, .690ops
LF Brown 26ab, 5bb/3k, 0/1sb, .669ops
3B Burns 22ab, 4bb/4k, 0/0sb, 1.189ops
SS Barney 26ab, 3bb/4k, 0/0sb, .802ops
2B Mier 27ab, 1bb/4k, 0/2sb, .913ops
1B Kotchman 21ab, 1bb/4k, 0/0sb, .511ops
DH Dominguez 21ab, 1bb/6k, 0/0sb, .661ops
C Jimenez 14ab, 2bb/2k, 0/0sb, 1.143ops

UT Berti 11ab, 0bb/4k, 0/1sb, .545ops
OF Carrera 18ab, 3bb/5k, 1/1sb, .405ops
IF Adams 20ab, 2bb/6k, 0/0sb, 1.105ops
C Sanchez 10ab, 1bb/4k, 0/0sb, .573ops

AA

UT Tellez 11ab, 1bb/3k, 0/0sb, .432ops
OF Fields 13ab, 0bb/3k, 1/2sb, 1.000ops
OF Alford 10ab, 3bb/4k, 0/0sb, .408ops
IF Urena 14ab, 0bb/1k, 1/2sb, .500ops
C Quintero 7ab, 0bb/4k, 0/0sb, .286ops

Ceciliani clearly leading the way in the 4th OF battle and Carrera so bad so far he's not even earningna starting spot in Buffalo. Still a good chance carrera or lake comes north though.

Barney obviously the Travis replacement but both Mier and Adams showing they might be useful in a pinch.






Lock Starters

SP Stroman 9.2ip, 0bb/9k, 0.72wh, 2.79era
SP Dickey 9.1ip, 1bb/2k, 0.96wh, 3.86era

Lock Relievers

RP Cecil 3.0ip, 0bb/4k, 1.33wh, 3.00era
RP Osuna 4.0ip, 1bb/4k, 1.00wh, 2.25era
RP Storen 5.0ip, 2bb/2k, 1.00wh, 1.80era
RP Loup ---

The Smorgasbord

SP/RP Sanchez 13.2ip, 3bb/15k, 1.02wh, 1.98era
SP/RP Floyd 12.1ip, 3bb/11k, 0.97wh, 2.19era
SP/RP Hutch 15.1ip, 5bb/9k, 0.98wh, 3.52era
SP/RP Hernandez 9.0ip, 2bb/7k, 1.22wh, 4.00era
SP/RP Happ 4.2ip, 1bb/3k, 1.50wh, 1.93era
SP/RP Chavez 10.0ip, 5bb/5k, 1.40wh, 4.50era
SP/RP Estrada 2.0ip, 3bb/1k, 2.50wh, 9.00era

Not a very clear pic at this point. Won't surprise me no matter how it shakes out.

Competing for the last 1-2 bullpen spots:

RP Biagini 7.0ip, 2bb/7k, 1.00wh, 3.86era
RP Delabar 6.0ip, 2bb/6k, 1.17wh, 3.00era
RP Venditte 6.0ip, 2bb/1k, 0.67wh, 0.00era
RP Leon 5.0ip, 2bb/2k, 0.60wh, 0.00era
RP Tepera 4.2ip, 1bb/3k, 1.07wh, 1.93era
RP Girodo 4.2ip, 1bb/3k, 1.07wh, 0.00era

All of them still have a shot.

"....Barney obviously the Travis replacement but both Mier and Adams showing they might be useful in a pinch...."

Yes.  But if there are any infield injuries, Andy Burns might be the first to be promoted.  Gibbons has described him as the surprise of training camp, and he says Burns's bat is "major-league ready."  His versatility helps too.  He can play the outfield, in a pinch.

But I agree that Adams and Mier have been impressive with the bat.  They were good depth acquisitions.