Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
Features The Front Office on Vacation Thread aka The Silence

It's very quiet out there. Hello there in the RC, is anybody home?

So it seems like baseball has settled into a big game of chicken. The front offices are holding out for falling demands and the players and agents are hoping for 2016 money. Meanwhile we debate the 25th spot on the roster while the silence engulfs us, deeper and deeper. Maybe this is all a plot by Martin Scorcese to publicize his new Silence movie.



David Schoenfield from ESPN has decided to liven up the proceedings with two Blue Jay stories. The first suggests that many teams don't want Bautista because he is a handful in the clubhouse. It is mostly speculation but Schoenfield weaves a couple of quotes from John Gibbons and Steve Phillips to make a narrative of sorts. He doesn't extend the narrative to Mark Trumbo to see if he can make a claim of clubhouse problems with him but that is another days work. We know the Orioles have rejected Jose for this reason, who knows if other clubs feel the same way?

Schoenfield has another story that has three reasons why the Jays are doomed to fail in 2017. The first reason is really two, an aging core of position players and lack of OBP to replace Jose and EE. Second is a lack of pitching depth and third an owner that is not committed to winning. An argument can be made around all of these points, and each one has been discussed on Da Box. However there are still 90 days to opening day and the roster will change by then. Its like forecasted standings at this time of the year, they are outdated before the season starts.

As I was writing this piece a stray thought came to mind. Assume the Jays do not want Bautista back. And also assume they know the PR on that could be very bad. If they did have a trade lined up, or a free agent signing lined up to replace Jose, would they hesitate to pull the trigger because Jose is still out there? Would they prefer to wait for Jose to come off the market and then sign a replacement, rather than get out in front, as they did with Edwin. This seems like a long shot but it could have an influence over some of the deep thinking somewhere in the process.

Meanwhile if your news consumption is more in the Entertainment Tonight category, it appears that Aaron Sanchez and Marcus Stroman are on the outs, or feuding, or talking about each other behind their backs. It is what fills the silence.

Meanwhile the front office silence endures. Here is a new thread for your prognostications.

Posted by Gerry on Friday, January 06 2017 @ 01:09 PM EST.
The Front Office on Vacation Thread aka The Silence | 350 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
PeterG - Friday, January 06 2017 @ 01:18 PM EST (#337347) #
Orioles acquire Seth Smith from Mariners for Yovani Gallardo.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Friday, January 06 2017 @ 01:53 PM EST (#337348) #
they got someone to take Gallardo AND give them a good player?

wow.
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Friday, January 06 2017 @ 01:59 PM EST (#337349) #
That's a good trade for the Orioles. Smith would have been a decent platoon OF option for the Jays.

In other "news", according to Heyman, Gavin Floyd will get $1M if he makes the team.
[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Friday, January 06 2017 @ 04:14 PM EST (#337352) #
This is an interesting piece on a number of different fronts from Travis Sawchik at fangraphs.  The lede concerns a front office hire from a football background into baseball, but in a lot of ways the side points interest me more. 

I had never thought about hydration during a long season with few interruptions as a major issue, but of course it makes sense.  Nutrition was on my radar, but not hydration. 
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Friday, January 06 2017 @ 05:12 PM EST (#337354) #
Gallardo could bounce back. Seth Smith is replacement level with bad defense and requires a platoon partner.

Baltimore's rotation is so bad than they might as well start anybody they have at AAA instead.

[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Friday, January 06 2017 @ 07:51 PM EST (#337358) #
The whole "Jose is a clubhouse cancer" narrative seems like clickbait to me.  How is his unpopularity with other teams evidence of his unpopularity with the Jays?  Does anyone here actually think a JD, Russ Martin or Tulo would walk on eggshells around the guy?  EE is on record as having talked about what a great teammate he is.  It's not Gibby - that guy could get along with anyone IMO, and he's not really pulling a lot of weight with the powers that be anyway - I assume if he gets off to a poor start to the season he's the fall guy for the FO. 

I've worked with plenty of groups of people, and one person - no matter how significant to the group - simply cannot be toxic by themselves, unless there are other issues with the club -say hello, Shea Hillenbrand.  If Jose, by himself, somehow poisoned this clubhouse, I'd put the blame for that on Gibby.

[ Reply to This ]
Petey Baseball - Friday, January 06 2017 @ 08:44 PM EST (#337359) #
It seems even reasonable people are starting to convince themselves the sky is falling. Yep, it stinks to see excellent players leave. But it's not like there's no precedent for teams losing stars and still contending. The A's lost Jason Giambi (the MVP), Johnny Damon, and an elite closer in Jason Isringhausen all in one off-season and still won a 100 games the next year. In 2001, the Mariners lost Alex Rodriguez and then won 116 games the next season.

[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Friday, January 06 2017 @ 09:59 PM EST (#337361) #
Jarrod Dyson has been traded to the M's for Nate Karns. I'm not sure if the Jays were even in on Dyson, but I don't think the Jays and Royals were a trade match anyway. Karns is a SP with four years of control left, and the Jays did not have an expendable pitcher like that.

I'm really curious to see what the Jays end up with as far as the rest of the off-season goes. The options are pretty limited, even including Bautista.
[ Reply to This ]
Dr B - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 12:55 AM EST (#337362) #
I've worked with plenty of groups of people, and one person - no matter how significant to the group - simply cannot be toxic by themselves,

I think there is some truth to this. In my (non-comprehensive, unscientific) experience, trouble-makers prefer to work in teams. When there is only one of them, they tend to leave by themselves (which is nice of them). It could explain the Bautista situation, but there does not appear to be any substantive evidence. So indeed, could well be clickbait.
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 07:13 AM EST (#337363) #
Bautista or another corner outfield, a lefty reliever and maybe a backup catcher.

Nobody seems to be on Bautista, There's 3 or 4  lefties left. They already have 3 catchers at AAA with Jimenez, McGuire and Ohlman.

[ Reply to This ]
China fan - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 08:00 AM EST (#337364) #
"....They already have 3 catchers at AAA with Jimenez, McGuire and Ohlman...."

Objectively, none of those guys is a major-league catcher.  Not yet, and maybe not ever.  To give them 40 games in the majors -- to save a few dollars in payroll -- is to consign one-ninth of the lineup to black-hole status. 

The Jays are smarter than that.  It's been reliably reported that they wanted to sign Bobby Wilson, who at least produced a .626 OPS in the majors last season, which is 150 points better than Josh Thole managed to produce last year.  Wilson chose instead to sign with the Dodgers (on a minor-league deal) but I'm sure the Jays will keep looking. 
[ Reply to This ]
Thomas - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 09:22 AM EST (#337365) #
I think there is certainly a plausible case to be made that Shapiro and Atkins would have preferred to move on from Bautista. I don't believe there has been any confirmation that the Jays have ever offered Bautista anything more than the qualifying offer, which they knew he was almost certain to turn down.

Additionally, although there were lots of media reports (accurate or not) of Bautista's contract demands last offseason, I don't believe there was ever a media report that the Jays made any proposal to him. Similarly, Bautista didn't indicate he wouldn't talk extension during the season, as opposed to Encarnacion, and the Jays never appear to have engaged him on that front.

However, while they may have preferred to move on from Bautista, I have a hard time believing that the front office would be unwilling to have Bautista back. Even if he is a slightly disruptive/uncomfortable person to be around given his intense personality, particularly when he struggles, this team is clearly in worse shape than it was last offseason, while Boston and Cleveland have noticeably improved on paper.

If, as suggested above, the Jays are simply unwilling to have him back (and purely offered the qualifying offer knowing for a near-certainty he'd turn it down), that's an approach I disagree with. This team made two straight ALCS with Bautista in the centre of the lineup, which suggests if there is any negative influence to his presence in the clubhouse, it's limited.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 10:04 AM EST (#337366) #
Damn we prob woulda won a world series of two without Bautista's toxic presence.
[ Reply to This ]
observer2010 - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 10:39 AM EST (#337367) #
It is interesting as well that while Edwin's agent expresses frustration about the short time the Jays' offer was made available, Edwin himself cut off previous negotiations at the end of the 2016 spring training, until the end of the season. He probably had some advice on that negotiating strategy.

This was not a practice imposed by the Jays, who did extend Smoak during the season.
[ Reply to This ]
Chuck - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 10:50 AM EST (#337368) #
If, as suggested above

That's below in my world. Not sure why you cats aren't reversing the sort order in these threads! These long threads must be insane to navigate otherwise. Scroll, scroll, scroll, scroll...

[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 11:03 AM EST (#337369) #
Is there any truth at all to the Bautista clubhouse toxicity? I think at this point it must be at least considered.

It's not unlike managing a project in any other profit-based business. You can't fire the players in ML baseball, but you can let them walk once you've made the decision that their on-field contributions aren't significantly outweighed by your estimation of their personality issues hurting the productivity of the rest of the team.

Bautista was a monster with the bat from 2010 to 2015, but in 2016 the team barely played above .500 when he was in the lineup, but won at almost a .650 clip when he wasn't. Sure, it's maybe not a big enough sample size to base your entire decision-making process on it, other than the fact that in every season from 2010 to 2015, Bautista's presence in the lineup made the team better (ie. his on-field performance outweighed any clubhouse issues) but when you combine that data point while considering Bautista's age and on-field decline, and since he's been an awful fielder for the last three years but keeps getting sent out to RF (again, Gibbons) and the myriad of articles proclaiming him the most-hated player in the league...?

He's not Barry Bonds - Barry Bonds was a much, much better hitter than Bautista. But Bautista might be ending his career just like Barry Bonds.
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 11:24 AM EST (#337370) #
During the season you cannot talk to other teams.

The NL teams were not interested. Boston and NY had no interest. Baltimore wasn't going to spend that much. The Rangers could have been a fit, but they really need to spend their money on pitching. Houston spend their money better and improved their team at multiple positions. In the end, it's pretty amazing that EE was able to get so much from Cleveland. That team went the to the World Series and lost in overtime and saw an opportunity to go all in. Otherwise he would have to settle for less.

Like Bautista probably will.

[ Reply to This ]
John Northey - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 11:26 AM EST (#337371) #
I think the issue with Bautista is also his big bonus. When he is going good the attitude he shows (complaining to umps, cocky on the field, knows he is the best and lets everyone know it) works, but if he is going badly then it flops. It might be more the Jays going 'this is a guy who isn't ready to be an elder statesman on the team but still is a guy who thinks he is late 20's peak and acts like it but doesn't play like it anymore'. Now, if he goes elsewhere for a year or two then comes back he might be at that point but I think he needs to go elsewhere first to move into that role.

In the 1990's the Jays made a mistake with Joe Carter, thinking he was still the core of the team when his value had cratered. From 1995 on he was negative for WAR every year and in 1994 he was at just 0.6. 1995 was his one and only year in Toronto with under 100 RBI's but sadly even that old school stat couldn't convince Gord Ash to dump him. His contract ran out at the end of 1995 but Ash extended him and dumped John Olerud. Lets hope our current front office is smarter than Ash.
[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 12:03 PM EST (#337372) #
Gord Ash never got a GM's job again - he's easily the worst GM we've ever had, and his love for Carter was proof of that.  But I don't see a fair comp with Jose and Joe - Joe was overrated nearly his entire career.  He was at least able to stay healthy till 94, thus racking up the counting stats.  But we simply didn't value OBP enough in the 90s to properly evaluate the guy.  Jose, even last year, still has the OBP skills. 

The difference between our record with vs. without Jose this year is pretty stark.  At what point does that sample become significant?  How much of that record is, in fact, attributable to Jose vs. luck?  I genuinely don't know.

It's pretty common for players not to negotiate contracts during the season, no?  I have no idea how you could measure the 'distraction factor' but it certainly fits anecdotally and intuitively that some players would want to concentrate on playing.  It would certainly distract me ...

[ Reply to This ]
Glevin - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 12:08 PM EST (#337373) #
The issue with Bautista is the draft pick. A pick in that range would probably be in the 10-15 prospect range for the Jays. So, essentially, it's as if you are trading a prospect like Maese or Pentecost for one year of Bautista at a large salary. It might be worth it but it's definitely a factor. Would you trade a 10-15 prospect for Brett Gardner or Granderson? Is that worse value? Personally,, I'd like Bautista back but I'd be fine with another option as well.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 12:10 PM EST (#337374) #
Check out the last 15yrs of cleveland sandwich picks.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 12:16 PM EST (#337375) #
The savaging of the character of a guy like Jose, who clearly works his arse off harder than anyone, has been an insane clutch performer, has given us our best memories of thebpast 20yrs, and clearly wants to be here.....all in the service of making our utterly fraudulent failure of an ownership entity look good.....is just sad.
[ Reply to This ]
BlueJayWay - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 12:21 PM EST (#337376) #
Lets hope our current front office is smarter than Ash.

If it isn't then we're all going to be in for a real terrible time.
[ Reply to This ]
cybercavalier - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 12:34 PM EST (#337377) #
"....They already have 3 catchers at AAA with Jimenez, McGuire and Ohlman...." Objectively, none of those guys is a major-league catcher.  Not yet, and maybe not ever.  To give them 40 games in the majors -- to save a few dollars in payroll -- The Jays are smarter than that. It's been reliably reported that they wanted to sign Bobby Wilson, who at least produced a .626 OPS in the majors last season, which is 150 points better than Josh Thole managed to produce last year.  Wilson chose instead to sign with the Dodgers (on a minor-league deal) but I'm sure the Jays will keep looking.

Let us check each possible free agent catcher, would we? Major League free agent catcher list bases on MLB.com; minor league free agent catcher bases on BA.com
MLB.com -- major league free agent catcher
Cabrera, Ramon age27
Gimenez, Chris age34
Hanigan, Ryan age36
Hundley, Nick age33
Iannetta, Chris age33
Navarro, Dioner age34
Pierzynski, AJ age40
Saltalamacchia, Jarrod age32
Suzuki, Kurt age33
Thole, Josh age30
Wieters, Matt age31

BA.com -- minor league free agent
Abreu, Adrain age25 lowA
Acosta, Mayo age29 SS
Anderson, Bryan age30 AAA
Arencibia, JP age31 AAA
Ashley, Nevin age 32 AAA
Astudilo, Willians age25 AA
Berset, Chris age28 AAA
Blair, Carson age27 AAA
Booker, Zach age31 AAA
Castillo, Wilkin age31 AAA
Clevenger, Steve age30 AAA
Conger, Hank age28 AAA
Del Castillo, Miguel age25 lowA
Dominguez, Wilmer age25 lowA
Glenn, Jeff age25 AAA
Gomez, Raywilly age26 AA
Hagerty, Jason age29 AAA
Hayes, Brett age32 AAA
Hurtado, Luis age28 AAA
Jones, PJ age23 AAA
Lopez, Rafael age29 AAA
Moore, Adam age32 AAA
Rodriguez, Jairo age28 AA
Santos, Omir age35 SS
Skipworth, Kyle age26 AAA
Thomas, Mark age28 AAA

If these two rosters are not up-to-date as they are supposed to on those two sites, the option for backup catcher is even less. Moreover, even with these choices, the choice is not good. Would Matt Wieters come to Toronto ?
[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 12:35 PM EST (#337378) #
Agreed that the comp pick has been pretty overstated as a reason not to make moves for top FAs -  AA's FO has a way better draft track record than Cleveland, but there are names like Dwight Smith, Mitch Nay, Kevin Comer and Tyler Gonzalez (25 career IPs) in there along with Sanchez and Thor. 

Man, 2010 was a spectacular draft - but even that one, with AA gaming the system like crazy and the draft team hitting gold with helium players like Thor, had plenty of busts.  

but Ugly, to be fair, nobody is really savaging Bautista.  Even the articles I've read about him - clickbait or not - admit to being pure speculation.  I don't think even the worst descriptions I've read about the guy constitute 'savaging'.  Personally, he seems the kind of guy I'd love to play with or coach.
[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 01:09 PM EST (#337379) #
Anyone else get the feeling that we don't sign Jose unless it becomes obvious that no other team will surrender a comp pick for him?

Worst case scenario is that he waits till the pick expires, signs cheaply with someone else and we get nada ... (my new nickname for Jay Bruce).

Dyson gone, Soto gone - we are running out of plan Bs.  I get the idea of waiting out the market, but do hope there is something worth waiting for at the end of this frustrating offseason. 

[ Reply to This ]
greenfrog - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 01:10 PM EST (#337380) #
One thing Anthopoulos figured out was that having as many high draft picks as possible improves your odds of finding some gems. Even if a number of his sandwich picks haven't worked out, the fact that he was able to acquire Sanchez and Syndergaard - two Cy Young-calibre pitchers - is enough to make his drafting in the sandwich round a resounding success.
[ Reply to This ]
eudaimon - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 03:56 PM EST (#337381) #
Yeah I'm thinking that the FO really wants the pick for Bautista. If it looks like they won't get a pick (ie: a Stephen Drew situation) they'll sign him. If they think the prospect/s or money or production they give up to get someone like Granderson, Moss, or Bruce is worse than losing the pick, they'll sign Bautista. Fair enough I suppose, though I think they should weigh the desires of the fans a little more into the equation, especially after losing Encarnacion. Bautista is a fan favourite and should be affordable on a one year deal.
[ Reply to This ]
observer2010 - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 04:17 PM EST (#337382) #
If there is any friction between Sanchez and Stroman, hopefully John Gibbons can take them aside together and sort it out early in spring training. Gibbons appears to have a good relationship with each of them.

An ongoing distraction would be the last thing this team would need to start off 2017, with everything else that has already gone on with the team this off season.
[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 04:28 PM EST (#337383) #
Agreed Eudaimon, at this point, it's not that much of a variation from the gameplan to throw the fans a bone with Bautista.

I don't think we've ever been in this position in the FA market where it seems we are waiting to find overlooked FAs at bargain prices at the end of the year - I have no idea if anyone else has used this strategy effectively, although this has been a weird FA market.  Our shot at this last year was Morales, but the strategy is closer to the drafting strategy Greenfrog mentioned - take a few gambles and one jackpot makes the whole endeavour worthwhile ... hopefully.

As for AA's drafting, 15 first round / comp picks overall (not including unsigned picks).  Sanchez, Stroman and Thor are the best by a longshot, followed by Musgrove, Hoffman, Harris and Pentacost. Next best is likely Asher Wojciechowski, 28 years old with 5 big league appearances.  The draft is indeed a crapshoot.  Hoffman was with the 9th pick overall, followed by Pentacost and Deck McGuire with the 11th.  I think the sheer number of picks AA's team had allowed them to take more risks - leading to Syndergard and, uhh, kevin comer. 

[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 05:25 PM EST (#337384) #
It occurred to me that Seattle's two trades yesterday amounted to a one-sided challenge trade- Seth Smith and Nate Karns for Jarrod Dyson and Yovani Gallardo.  You might call it a trade of power (both with the bat and with the K) for ball-in-play prowess.  There could be more to it than that - Gallardo's control appeared to have been MIA last year and it might be that he is done (but I don't think so). 
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 06:14 PM EST (#337385) #
I don't think we've ever been in this position in the FA market where it seems we are waiting to find overlooked FAs at bargain prices at the end of the year - I have no idea if anyone else has used this strategy effectively, although this has been a weird FA market.

That's pretty much what Texas did last year signing Ian Desmond at the last minute for 8M.
They still won their division and got their draft pick back.

They haven't done much this year neither.
They signed Andrew Cashner, who was pretty bad last year and that only take care of 4 rotation spot.
They resigned Carlos Gomes who is as predictable as Melvin Upton JR. 
They lost Beltran, Moreland and Holland and will possibly grab a right handed bat to platoon at 1B/DH for very little.
That and they signed a  bunch of minor leagues deals like Travis Snider, Steven Lerud, Jaye Chapman and Brady Dragmire.

What's Bautista's market value for a one year deal now?
Cots predicted he'd get 4/85, but now I don't think he gets more than 1/15.
[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Saturday, January 07 2017 @ 08:16 PM EST (#337386) #
Was that the strategy last season though, or did Desmond just sort of fall into their lap?  Not sure ... this year, I still prefer Texas' offseason to ours ... I prefer Gomez to Morales, and while I don't love Cashner at $10 million, that's not that much different than our value add of Pearce in terms of potential impact.

But it's the losses that concern me - Beltran, Moreland and Holland are not Jose, EE and Cecil.  
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 07:15 AM EST (#337387) #
Maybe, but Boston and NYY have signed Moreland and Beltran and snubbed their noses at Jose and EE.
[ Reply to This ]
mathesond - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 10:53 AM EST (#337388) #
"The savaging of the character of a guy like Jose, who clearly works his arse off harder than anyone, has been an insane clutch performer, has given us our best memories of thebpast 20yrs, and clearly wants to be here.....all in the service of making our utterly fraudulent failure of an ownership entity look good.....is just sad."

Hey, Boston did it to such franchise luminaries as Garciaparra and Ramirez (among others), and managed to win multiple World Series...:)
[ Reply to This ]
mathesond - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 10:56 AM EST (#337389) #
Apropos of nothing, this comic reminds me that baseball is just a few short weeks away.
[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 12:11 PM EST (#337390) #
Thanks for that, mathesond. My family saw the play Infinity yesterday. It is about in large part the nature of time. The comic was for me at least very (can't stop myself) timely.
[ Reply to This ]
greenfrog - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 01:30 PM EST (#337391) #
Here's David Schoenfeld's current take on the 2017 Blue Jays:

http://www.espn.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/77203/why-the-blue-jays-are-due-for-a-big-fall-in-2017

Here's his conclusion:

No, the offseason isn't over, but this looks like a .500 club. The Encarnacion/Bautista era had its moments, but it appears that the window closed when Ryan Merritt and the Tribe shut the Blue Jays down in Game 5 of the 2016 ALCS.
[ Reply to This ]
Nigel - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 01:39 PM EST (#337392) #
Assuming Schoenfeld is correct, Rogers will be cool with that outcome. They are going to mint cash this season.
[ Reply to This ]
greenfrog - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 01:47 PM EST (#337393) #
I guess the front office really wanted those two sandwich picks.
[ Reply to This ]
Glevin - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 02:54 PM EST (#337394) #
I think schoenfeld is a bit pssimistic but understandably so at this point. The Jays are probably around the 80-85 win area right now but I'd be surprised if they don't add another good player or two. Also, Schoenfeld lists four reasons for pessimism for the Jays. Aging core, lack of pitching depth, cheap owners and lack of major league ready prospects. As much as Shapiro and Atkins have become whipping boys, how many of those things are their fault? They took over a team with an aging core, no pitching depth, no prospects near the majors, and cheap owners.
[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 03:06 PM EST (#337395) #
Young, faster, better defense and more balance are what the Jays are trying to do. Neither Edwin nor Jose meet the new requirements. Morales is a switch hitter, he's younger than Jose but that's it. Pearce defends well and has some speed. He will also limit Smoak's at bats. Signing Morales and Pearce costs much less than Edwin and fills an extra position. The extra draft picks earned are a nice bonus .
[ Reply to This ]
Nigel - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 03:16 PM EST (#337396) #
I don't think Rogers is cheap at all. They are just in the business of making money and bought the Jays for guaranteed content to fill television hours. They have decided to operate the team, from a budgetary perspective, in a manner to try and ensure a marginally competitive team every year. Nothing more nothing less. With the current construct of the roster that means an offseason of treading water rather than going for it or ripping it apart - either of which I could support. I think the current roster with a significant piece in the OF and in the bullpen could be a potential playoff team. If the front office doesn't think the remaining core is good enough then they should be blowing the core up. I think the only plan for the offseason that didn't make any sense was to do nothing. Which of course, is exactly what has happened to date. There is time though.

[ Reply to This ]
PeterG - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 03:51 PM EST (#337397) #
Moat assume that the Jays seeming disinterest in Bautista is because of the comp pick or a real or imagined clubhouse issue. Could the more relevant factor simply be that a left handed batter is very much preferred.
[ Reply to This ]
ISLAND BOY - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 04:11 PM EST (#337398) #
Also the fact he may be looking for more than they're willing to pay. They don't want to use up most of their remaining budget on one player when they have several holes left to fill.
[ Reply to This ]
Chuck - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 04:31 PM EST (#337399) #
They have decided to operate the team, from a budgetary perspective, in a manner to try and ensure a marginally competitive team every year. Nothing more nothing less.

Which is entirely their prerogative. Just as it would be my prerogative to pay them back with a corresponding marginal level of interest and product consumption.

Their bean counters will surely engage in game theory to find the happy spot for maximal returns. I don't pretend for a minute to be any more skilled at this than they are, but it should be at least a little instructive to look back at what happened after the team's two World Series seasons. Yes, the Skydome was new and that played a role in packed houses (remember when you couldn't even get a decent ticket to a regular season game?), and certainly Blue Jay success was new, but it didn't take long for attendance to drop from 50K to 30K, and then into 20s for a good long slog. Toronto is a fickle baseball city and not one that treats mediocrity with enthusiasm.

All of this is to say that I don't think they can simply bank on the city's unconditional love, at least not indefinitely. I think next year is a free one. The fans will come out based on the success of the last two seasons. But if they field a middling team in 2018, they might be courting trouble.

An unknown in all this, and a huge caveat to my blathering, is that we are now a generation removed from the World Series. Maybe this new generation is a different, more forgiving animal. I don't know. I do know that I saw lots and lots of newbie fans at games last summer, not surprising given the 40K turnouts. Whether they will be the first to jump ship, I don't know. But maybe they are on the cusp of becoming lifelong fans and will show patience with their new favourite team.

[ Reply to This ]
Chuck - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 05:09 PM EST (#337400) #
Young, faster, better defense and more balance are what the Jays are trying to do.

This may well be true, but there's little evidence thus far. If we assume Bautista (b. 1980) is not coming back, then he and Encarnacion (b. 1983) will be replaced by Pearce (b. 1983) and Morales (b. 1983).

So a little younger and little better defensively. I don't know that the two new guys are collectively faster than the two departed. Morales is slow like a Molina.

[ Reply to This ]
PeterG - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 05:11 PM EST (#337401) #
No doubt some fairweather fans will be lost if it is a midlin team. They will return when the teams wins. In order to keep fans year after year, a sustained contender is necessary.
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 05:46 PM EST (#337402) #
Schoenfeld must not follow the Jays very closely.

"It's been a fun 2 seasons for the Toronto  Blue Jays."

2015 was as miserable as the years before and became fun only after AA traded everything he could to get Tulo and Price and fill some gaping holes.
2016 started miserably as well with offense being absent for long swathes of time and the bullpen blowing leads every other day.  Anybody had fun last September when the offense disappeared?

Texas and Cleveland is were the fun was.
[ Reply to This ]
Nigel - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 06:08 PM EST (#337403) #
Chuck, I agree with all of your post. It absolutely is Rogers' prerogative. I agree next is a free year and with public company executives largely compensated on short term measures, I think Rogers executives have zero incentive to authorize a large increase in payroll. Secondly, I sensed zero concern from Rogers when the Jays were drawing 20k a game. The Jays were still fulfilling their purpose of providing content for the cable platform.
[ Reply to This ]
China fan - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 06:31 PM EST (#337404) #
".....2015 was as miserable as the years before and became fun only after AA traded everything he could to get Tulo and Price and fill some gaping holes.
2016 started miserably as well with offense being absent for long swathes of time and the bullpen blowing leads every other day.  Anybody had fun last September when the offense disappeared?...."

Wow.  What a great example of the natural gloom-and-doom tendencies of a specific sector of Jays fandom.  You were miserable for so much of the past two years?  Amazing.  It suggests that you were already writing off both seasons from the beginning, unable to see the playoff potential of both teams.  What would make you happy?  Would you be happy only with a steamroller 110-win season, where you wouldn't have a moment of doubt or struggle?  Why are you so unwilling to tolerate the natural days of doubt and struggle that occur in every team's life?

This psychology of misery is a good explanation of why some people want to give up on 2017 (after earlier almost giving up on 2015 and 2016). This is why some people want to limit the payroll and blow up the team and dump the veterans and go into immediate rebuild mode -- because they get greater satisfaction from watching the slow progression of prospects, rather than the playoff aspirations of a strong mixture of veterans and young players.

Personally I was never miserable when the Jays were struggling in some parts of the past two seasons, because it's much more enjoyable to watch a team fight hard to overcome its challenges and reach the playoffs and then reach the final four in the majors.   The struggle is what creates enjoyment and interest in most fans.  It shouldn't create misery.
[ Reply to This ]
China fan - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 06:35 PM EST (#337405) #
".....They have decided to operate the team, from a budgetary perspective, in a manner to try and ensure a marginally competitive team every year. Nothing more nothing less...."

I hope this is not true, but I agree that there is some evidence to suggest that it might be true.

Certainly the owners didn't seem very happy when a GM decided to exceed those "marginally competitive" parameters by gambling on acquiring the high-priced veterans that would push the team finally into the playoffs.
[ Reply to This ]
BlueJayWay - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 06:49 PM EST (#337406) #
They have decided to operate the team, from a budgetary perspective, in a manner to try and ensure a marginally competitive team every year. Nothing more nothing less.

I've been thinking this for years. Rogers of course doesn't want the Jays to be terrible, but they are reluctant to really give them a huge payroll, on the chance that it doesn't work. The result is a mid-rangey payroll for the most part. An 82-86 win true talent team forever is what Rogers seems to want to aim for, budgetarily.


[ Reply to This ]
Jimbag - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 07:20 PM EST (#337407) #
Oh, man - the past two years weren't miserable at all. Even 2014 was good until the trade deadline...and I still kind of hold it against Bautista and Janssens for piping up when no deals were made. The A's were busy at the deadline, and that worked out spectacularly for them, didn't it?

And I don't know if I agree about the "cheap owners". I mean, they threw everything at the fridge with the Marlins and Mets deals....nothing stuck, but they risked money and prospects to try and force the issue. The deals that brought Donaldson, Tulo, Price, etc. all cost more in payroll than they were carrying the day before the deals were struck.

Yeah, it feels like nothing good has happened this off-season, I get it. And that makes it feel like there's no momentum going into 2017 - but the roster as of this minute won't be the opening day roster. It seems like some people think the rosters freeze as of Jan. 1 - there's still unsigned free agents out there (none of whom are all that terribly attractive, I agree), there's still at least a possibility of a trade that could make an impact. The team is in no way improved at this point, but that doesn't mean that nothing can or will happen to change that.

I have been a fan of this team since 1977, and it was fantastic being a fan in the early days, with a fair bit of roster turnover and a fair bit of success (believe me, it had to be more fun to be a Jays fan than a Mariners fan for those first 15 years!), and I'm grateful to have been treated to consecutive post-season runs.

[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Sunday, January 08 2017 @ 09:30 PM EST (#337408) #
Last year was loaded with frustrating experiences. Did you watch the Canada Day game?
I predicted early on that a wild card spot needed only 88 wins, but even then it was gruesome.
There were some great moments for sure but I wouldn't describe it as a fun season.
To me that's when you grab a lead in April and  hang on to it all year.

2014 was actually better than 2015 up to the deadline. The Jays were 1 run below .500 at the 2015 deadline.
If you think that's fun, then you shouldn't have anything to worry about. That's achievable with today's roster.

[ Reply to This ]
Jimbag - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 12:45 AM EST (#337409) #
2015 was a roller-coaster, and at the AS break I was starting to think maybe Jose and Casey were onto something when they were complaining about having done nothing the previous year. But the division was up for grabs right up until the Jays went on that second tear after the trade deadline....win/loss means nothing if you aren't in the hunt, and they were never out of it in '15. Close, for sure, and frustrating to watch sometimes - but it's only frustrating if (as a fan) you still think they're in the picture. A 10 game win streak to finish up 5 games out of a playoff spot doesn't have the same adrenaline as, say, last September did. There were times when I was close to writing them off, but I was always back in the saddle for the next game.

I get to as many games as I can, and watch as much as possible - even if it's Jays in 30 because I got stuck working, I pay attention. Wins are great, but if the team is 83-72 and 5 games out of a playoff spot going into the last week, I'm probably going to be watching less attentively (and paying more attention to personal milestones for the players) than I would if they were 78-77 and 1 game out. I mean, 2006 was the high-water mark for team wins in the new century (until the past 2 seasons), but they weren't in the picture in September so it ultimately didn't make for an exciting finish.

The roster does need to be upgraded, and I believe it will be. I think the offense could be better with a different approach than what we're used to (ie: loads of solo shots) and getting better L/R balance is a must. The bullpen is nowhere near elite status as it stands right now, and that frankly concerns me more than the offensive side. But there's still time to address those needs. So concern is absolutely justified, but there's no need to go painting your windows black in January. Wait until May, at least :)



[ Reply to This ]
85bluejay - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 08:08 AM EST (#337410) #
I am paying attention to the Mark Trumbo FA - If the Orioles go in another direction, Trumbo may end up in Colorado, pushing Desmond to the outfield and hopefully Charlie Blackmon to Toronto - the Jays are not going to trade Stroman but maybe a package built around J.A. Happ (selling high) gets the job done - An opening day outfield of Blackmon/Pillar/Pagan along with ground-baller Brett Anderson (yes, I'm willing to gamble on his oft-injured arm) in the rotation to replace Happ and Travis Wood as the lefty swingman and I'm optimistic about the season. Of course , this fantasy will take some time to develop, maybe going into February - But I remember the 1984 Cubs did not trade for Gary Matthews until late March.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 09:17 AM EST (#337411) #
many fans enjoy dreaming on a bad team full of iffy prospects more than being in a playoff race with a team that isn't the clearcut favorite.

for them, the latter is actually a bad even torturous experience, while year after year of noncontention with no expectations is actually fun as long as there are a few kids to dream on.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 09:35 AM EST (#337412) #
This comp pick obsession is just another kick in the jibblies.

What would be better for the Yanks' future right now - the trade return they got on their "awful" contracts last year or the draft picks they sacrificed to sign them in the first place?
[ Reply to This ]
James W - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 09:51 AM EST (#337413) #
The Jays were 1 run below .500 at the 2015 deadline.

Quick correction on this. While the team was 1 win below .500 on July 28, they were 94 runs ahead (and would make it +100 with an 8-2 win in Tulowitzki's first game.) Perhaps that was also frustrating to you, seeing a team that should have been leading the division instead mired in fourth place.
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 09:58 AM EST (#337414) #
According to FG, Morales was a slightly better base runner than Bautista in 2016. I wouldn't expect that to continue, unless Jose's lower body injuries from last year are still an issue, but it may not be a significant difference.

I wouldn't put a narrative behind the moves we've seen so far, other than Guirrel who does fit what the FO has been doing since last year. Morales and Pearce are short-term fixes in areas where the Jays do not have internal talent to take over. That's really the short and long of it. Maybe Morales being a switch hitter that doesn't typically have a platoon disadvantage factored into acquiring him, but the "get younger, fast, better defensive" stuff is not something a team has any real control over unless they have players already in house that could do that. The Jays are at the mercy of the FA market, especially if they don't want to move prospects, so you take the best of what is out there. If it fits the "get more left-handed" or "get faster" need, then that's great. If not, you just have to sign the best talent available at your price range and in this case they felt it was a slow guy who can hit the ball hard (Morales).
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 10:02 AM EST (#337415) #
EE has the same term as "short term fix" Morales.
[ Reply to This ]
pubster - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 10:47 AM EST (#337416) #
"many fans enjoy dreaming on a bad team full of iffy prospects"

I don't think anyone dreams about this :)
[ Reply to This ]
pubster - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 10:51 AM EST (#337417) #
"I don't know that the two new guys are collectively faster than the two departed. Morales is slow like a Molina."

If Bautista doesn't come back it could mean more playing time for Upton and probably Carrera/Pompey as well. That would be a much faster outfield than with Saunders and Bautista playing the corner OF positions.
[ Reply to This ]
Mike D - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 11:03 AM EST (#337418) #
That Schoenfeld story really put the payroll into stark relief. I agree that there is time to add to it, but the current status of a $41 million slash in payroll with only one young-ish player (Gourriel) to show for it...egads.
[ Reply to This ]
BlueJayWay - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 11:18 AM EST (#337419) #
Ben Nicholson-Smith on radio about Bautista, saying the Jays really want that pick.



[ Reply to This ]
christaylor - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 11:18 AM EST (#337420) #
[citation needed]

I agree with many of your posts on here uglyone but is this a claim about the fans in general? The fans on this site? For the former, I doubt most casual fans (by which I mean the fans who are among the number who provided the attendance bump over the past two seasons) know or care about the prospects or future of the organization. They are the ones who wanted Price, EE, or Cespedes, because those were/are names that are well known. Around here, I think everyone wants a winner but is a little more convinced by the sustainable winner idea. This is, I would argue, the sensible approach. We may not like, but accept, that the Jays are a mere cog in a corporate empire and a cog that may get infusions of cash now and then but can never be expected to be much outside of a top 10 payroll.

The more committed fans are likely to find something positive, even on a bad team or a team that put up year after year of mediocre performance. Sure prospects play into that (see McGowan) but those mediocre teams we loved -- one name, Roy Halladay. That said, who knows, you could be correct about the Jays fan base, although I don't suspect so, no one here has hard data, but if you're collecting data, I'm fine with a playoff race with an iffy team. Which is, I think what the 2017 Jays are at the moment.

Also relevant the Jays are probably joined by the Red Sox as a team with payroll parameters: http://www.inquisitr.com/3867091/boston-red-sox-rumors-why-the-team-didnt-try-to-sign-edwin-encarnacion/
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 11:22 AM EST (#337421) #
It is not an insult. It's just a matter of tastes. I have no doubt that some fans actually found last year literally less enjoyable than other years when we were much worse.
[ Reply to This ]
Chuck - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 11:27 AM EST (#337422) #
If Bautista doesn't come back it could mean more playing time for Upton and probably Carrera/Pompey as well. That would be a much faster outfield than with Saunders and Bautista playing the corner OF positions.

True enough. But punting offense in both outfield corners can't possibly be the game plan. Some Bruce-like lunk will surely be called in to serve as a statue in one of the corners.

[ Reply to This ]
pubster - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 11:58 AM EST (#337423) #
What I find interesting, is that according to FanGraphs, Kevin Pillar had almost as much WAR as EE last season, and much more WAR than Bautista.

So would replacing a guy like Bautista with a guy like Pillar (Pompey?) make the team better than replacing him with a clunky outfielder (Bruce?) who has a better OPS?

Heres the URL to the FanGraphs stats:

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2016&month=0&season1=2016&ind=0&team=14&rost=0&age=0)

[ Reply to This ]
pubster - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 12:00 PM EST (#337424) #
Sorry this is the URL:

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2016&month=0&season1=2016&ind=0&team=14&rost=0&age=0
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 12:02 PM EST (#337425) #
"But punting offense in both outfield corners can't possibly be the game plan. "

mighta worked if we had maxed out offense at 1B/DH.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 12:05 PM EST (#337426) #
"So would replacing a guy like Bautista with a guy like Pillar (Pompey?) make the team better than replacing him with a clunky outfielder (Bruce?) who has a better OPS?"

yep. Our corner OF defense was so bad last year that going with dirt cheap speed and defense at the corners this year and expecting similar value from those slots (maybe even better) was entirely plausible.

But to really make that work, we would probably have had to make sure our 1B/DH slots were both upgraded to having the best offense possible there.

But now with the downgrade offensively at 1B/DH, it's much tougher to make an all speed and defense corner OF slots work, I think.
[ Reply to This ]
pubster - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 12:16 PM EST (#337427) #
1. There's a downgrade at 1b/DH.

2. Liriano + new catcher is an upgrade over Dickey + Thole.

3. speed in the corner OF positions is an upgrade over Bautista/Saunders.


If we agree to those 3 statements, then I don't think the team got worse. I think it stayed about the same, but with different types of players - which isn't bad since they were a World Series contender last year.
[ Reply to This ]
Chuck - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 12:26 PM EST (#337428) #
then I don't think the team got worse. I think it stayed about the same

Unrelated to the positon players, one thing to stay cognizant of is the luck the team had in 2016 with respect to starting pitcher health. The Plan A starters got 160 of the team's 162 starts. Hutchison's 2 starts were the sum and whole of the demands placed on Plan B starters. This type of Plan A/Plan B workload split is not likely to be repeated.

[ Reply to This ]
bpoz - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 12:30 PM EST (#337429) #
I agree with Gerry that it is very quiet out there. I find the silence really strange.

A few other Bauxites have said that they are finding that the off season has slowed down. The off season is not over until the first real game is played.

My guess is that all the unsigned FA players are unsigned for a reason. But why so few trades? Seattle just made 2 trades. Seattle, Baltimore and KC traded ML talent for ML talent. By the quality of the players involved IMO they were just shoring up some weak areas.

Trumbo and Bautista and maybe a handful of others have a recent past that offers hope for good production. But nobody is buying. By nobody I mean all of baseball. My guess is that they do not want to pay some factor of the price.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 12:33 PM EST (#337430) #
"If we agree to those 3 statements, then I don't think the team got worse. I think it stayed about the same, but with different types of players - which isn't bad since they were a World Series contender last year."

I think it's a tick down from last year overall.

But I also think we could have easily upgraded our team this offseason instead of treading water.
[ Reply to This ]
bpoz - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 12:49 PM EST (#337431) #
I feel that we will not get a lefty reliever with the history of Cecil. He was probably to expensive to sign. So on paper the pen is weaker.
[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 01:46 PM EST (#337432) #
Before anyone comments on the 1B/DH situation we should fairly evaluate what we have. I do not understand how Justin Smoak vanished last year. He now has life-changing money. He's had an offseason to recover. He has a platoon partner forcing him to hit left-handed, who can also limit his ABs when needed. Steve Pearce is healthy. He defends 1B very well. How well he hits here is unknown, but there could be an uptick, although he hits well enough. Kendrys Morales hit 57 HRs over two years in a place where HRs go to die. Power-hitters always experience an uptick when becoming a Jay, so why should he be any different? He should never play more than one game a week at 1B.

I don't call it a downgrade at 1B/DH when I expect the total numbers to be similar, but the defense is a vast improvement.
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 01:54 PM EST (#337433) #
A lot has been made about home runs not being valued as much now, but this just happens to be a free agent class with a ton of home runs and nothing else. Teams might be starting to value defense and base running (or WAR in general). They might see a bunch of free agents with power but low OBP's, high K's, and no defensive value. Bautista at least gets on base in addition to power, but his defense and base running value has declined and he is attached to a QO at age 36.

It's a flawed FA market. There are enough warts to get turned off by even 40 HR players. The Jays waiting it out is the smart thing to do, but at the end of the day, the talent is what it is. They'll have to find creative ways to get the most out of what's out there. For example, they can sign Moss, play him exclusively in the OF, and platoon him with Upton. Or they can sign Valbuena, play him at 1B against RHP with Pearce in LF, and then against LHP switch Pearce to 1B and Upton to LF. Something along those lines. There's no real perfect answer in free agency. They'll have to figure something out creatively.
[ Reply to This ]
whiterasta80 - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 01:58 PM EST (#337434) #
Oh my God. The negativity is killing me. Please Atkins for the love of God sign a minor league free agent, name a new minor league manager or claim someone off waivers and then waive him 2 days later.

People complaining about ownership's commitment really need a lesson in what a bad owner is.

I acknowledge that we didn't bring back Bautista or EE but those moves can be justified for baseball reasons. In the meantime we were the highest bidder on a high profile international free agent and are just 6 months removed from essentially buying two prospects. We are 1.5 years removed from adding the two biggest salaries at the deadline. There's no free agent (other than EE who were were the highest bidder on) who would have been good value to us this offseason. Sometimes you just have to cut your losses and save the bullets for the deadline (or next offseason).

Also, if Rogers is just matching inflation in their recent payroll raises then please explain to me why only a handful of franchises around the league are doing the same. Still others are cutting payroll (Detroit). They have given the front office plenty of $$ to build a competitive team.

We are on the heels of 2 consecutive playoff appearances. Virtually any team will take a step back after that. At least we are doing it in a way that will allow us to "re-tool" rather than "rebuild".

[ Reply to This ]
Gerry - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 02:11 PM EST (#337435) #
Andy Burns is headed to Japan to play there.
[ Reply to This ]
pubster - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 02:29 PM EST (#337436) #
If the starting pitching isn't healthy then I agree that the team will probably struggle.

I'm looking forward to the year. I think its going to be another exciting season.



[ Reply to This ]
lexomatic - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 02:33 PM EST (#337437) #
I acknowledge that we didn't bring back Bautista [...] but those moves can be justified for baseball reasons.

I would argue that Bautista not being back is a baseball move. Bautista on a 1 year deal even at the QO is perfectly reasonable. I think next year is his bounce-back year, and he'll be worth more than that. Either way, 1 year, at a rate that would pay him to be about an average player should be a no brainer where the team is. Is the pick worth more? not really, it's more of a lottery ticket. This is/was the last season I could see the Jays being reasonably competitive for the playoffs, it's the time when it makes sense to spend a bit more to try and win, but not block younger players. A 1-year deal doesn't prevent that. You make sure to arrange that you can trade him by the August deadline, so you can get something back.
To me this just appears to be a "We don't like Bautista and won't sign him despite it making sense. Because." Does the Front Office have more information? Absolutely, but I sure as hell will lose interest quickly in a team that makes decisions that don't seem founded on any reason.  Someone else posted earlier, the desire for the comp pick seems fetishistic.

We have so little to discuss at the moment that this offseason has been particularly annoying because we're all rehashing the same points, it seems like endlessly. I almost hope that the team tanks to start so the last tradeable players get sent away. My general impression so far of management is competence lacking vision. Competence is what I want from underlings, not leaders. I hope the next few years proves me wrong.

[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 02:37 PM EST (#337438) #
When you check Lirianno's record with Russell catching you'll be surprised. This is a big upgrade on Dickey. Any warm body is a huge upgrade over Thole. Getting someone good will be a godsend.
[ Reply to This ]
Gerry - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 03:04 PM EST (#337439) #
Got my countries wrong, its Korea for Andy Burns.
[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 03:26 PM EST (#337440) #
The Bullpen consists of one of the best Closers in Baseball. Joe Biagini is now an experienced late inning Reliever. Last spring he was a raw rookie. Jason Grilli is an experienced late inning Reliever. Last spring he was with another Team. If Gavin Floyd is healthy hme makes the Team, he's a Gibbon's favorite. Better usage might keep healthy. Gibbon's gave him high leverage innings and more than three outs. Already this is a better Bullpen than last Spring, but it's still one injury away from being not good enough.
[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 03:26 PM EST (#337441) #
Schoenfeld said:

"Without Encarnacion, Bautista and Saunders, the Blue Jays will be missing three of their top four on-base guys from 2016. Remember, the offense already dropped 132 runs from 2015, even as more runs were scored across the league. This looks to be one of the worst offenses in the league."

That's extreme.  It is true that they have lost offence, with Morales and Pearce replacing two of the bats, but there is reason to believe that the offence will again be (more or less) middle of the pack, courtesy of additional batted ball information about Morales and Tulowitzki from Tony Blengino, and some contributions from Pompey and Tellez.  They do still need an outfielder (sorry for the repetition!). 

[ Reply to This ]
Mylegacy - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 03:36 PM EST (#337442) #
The FO - to paraphrase many: "really wants that pre-second round pick."

I agree, that is what they want. They see THREE pre-round 2 picks as a gift to them as they begin to rebuild the team/system in the image of their dreams.

Unfortunately, for the FO... the dream of Bautista's pick is more like they're sitting in a small boat, sailing in a rough sea of BJ fans, with an anvil on a chain, the chain attached securely to the FO's necks. When Jose is NOT SIGNED by another team before the season, when the Jays DON'T get that Holy Grail of a pick...The anvil will officially be thrown overboard - with the front office following unceremoniously close behind and as they sink in a sea of frothing BJ Sea Monsters screaming at them they'll wail to the Heaven's, "We din't think he wouldn't sign with SOMEONE!!!"

Hell. Path. Paved. Stupidity...
[ Reply to This ]
pubster - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 03:49 PM EST (#337443) #
I think the last time the Jays had 4 pre-second round picks they draftet Aaron Sanchez and Noah Syndergaard.

Hopefully these new guys can draft'em like AA.
[ Reply to This ]
PeterG - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 04:21 PM EST (#337444) #
Oh, the management has vision I can assure you. They are just not telling the press or public what it is. It will become more clear with time.....there is a lot going on that has nothing to do with the major league roster. I agree that it is hard to wait for something specific but it's not like the Jays are the only team seemingly quiet.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 04:54 PM EST (#337445) #
many fans enjoy dreaming on a bad team full of iffy prospects more than being in a playoff race with a team that isn't the clearcut favorite.

Are you talking about the Blue Jays?

Don't they have an awesome farm system full of prospects that are underrated by the rest of ML baseball?

This comp pick obsession is just another kick in the jibblies.

Of course it is. The Jays have never drafted anyone good with those compensation picks.

It's clear that you're angry about the Jays' refusal to spend whatever it takes to extend their declining assets, but it seems difficult for your posts to be taken seriously when your narrative changes to support whatever argument you're trying to support this week.
[ Reply to This ]
pubster - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 05:00 PM EST (#337446) #
Hey Parker,

I think the Jays drafted Sanchez and Syndergaard with compensation picks.

But nobody liked the Syndergaard pick because he was an easy sign - it was a sign that management was being cheap again. :)
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 05:02 PM EST (#337447) #
"They are just not telling the press or public what it is. It will become more clear with time"

They should tell us. We'd appreciate honesty.
[ Reply to This ]
pubster - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 05:02 PM EST (#337448) #
Take a look at those comp picks:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/draft/index.cgi?team_ID=TOR&year_ID=2010&draft_type=junreg&query_type=franch_year
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 05:05 PM EST (#337449) #
I don't think the FO is being vague with their intentions. They want to rebuild the farm system, but they happened to inherit a team with a short-term window, so they want to take advantage of that as well without sacrificing one for the other. Hence, short-term vets to try to win short-term, while maintaining/adding onto the system to build towards something more sustainable down the line.

They don't have to re-sign Bautista to remain competitive. It would certainly help if the alternative is Carrera, but I think it's safe to say they'll add at least one OF from now until ST, if not more. I see nothing wrong with valuing the draft pick, as long as the Jays are not rolling out Carrera-Pillar-Upton in the OF to start the season.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 05:10 PM EST (#337450) #
Hey Parker,

I think the Jays drafted Sanchez and Syndergaard with compensation picks.

But nobody liked the Syndergaard pick because he was an easy sign - it was a sign that management was being cheap again. :)

You're right on the mark, pubster. That part of my post was a badly-failed attempt at sarcasm, based on uglyone's comments.

The Jays have drafted some really great players with those "kick-in-the-jibblies comp pick obsessions."

:)
[ Reply to This ]
pubster - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 05:14 PM EST (#337451) #
Oh right! I can totally see how that would be sarcastic.

Thanks for clarifying.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 05:16 PM EST (#337452) #
They should tell us. We'd appreciate honesty.

By "we", I'm assuming you're talking about Blue Jays front office personnel? Or season ticket holders? Didn't you get the memo?

Or did you mean random mooks on the internet who claim to be fans but really just spout random opinions ad nauesam that they try to pass off as actual baseball commentary?
[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 05:19 PM EST (#337453) #
The battle of the projection systems, v. 10.   The takeaway: Marcel the monkey is very competitive despite being remarkably simple.  It's the ETF of projection systems. 
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 05:20 PM EST (#337454) #
yes, by "we" i meant us random reactionary silly idiot mooks on the internet. also all the random reactionary silly mooks calling into radio stations. aka fans.

we would appreciate the honesty. it's the seeming dishonesty that is really driving us nuts.

[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 05:22 PM EST (#337455) #
""The Jays have drafted some really great players with those "kick-in-the-jibblies comp pick obsessions.""

Well, one Jays GM did, at least.

How many did the Indians draft with those picks in, say, the last 15yrs?
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 05:34 PM EST (#337456) #
Well, one Jays GM did, at least.

How many did the Indians draft with those picks in, say, the last 15yrs?

That post was written as if you think the GM personally drafts anyone after the first round.

Since the Jays have retained almost every employee in their scouting department since Anthopoulos abandonded the team, you really don't have anything to worry about.
[ Reply to This ]
pubster - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 06:58 PM EST (#337457) #
Check how many times the Indians have won 90+ he's in the past 15 or so years. It's pretty impressive.
[ Reply to This ]
pubster - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 07:00 PM EST (#337458) #
"He's" should be "games". My bad.
[ Reply to This ]
Gerry - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 07:34 PM EST (#337459) #
Bad news for Turkey Dog vendors......Colby Rasmus is headed to Tampa Bay.
[ Reply to This ]
PeterG - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 07:36 PM EST (#337460) #
So Bobby Wilson turned down the Jays because they wouldn't promise not to bring in another Catcher. This would seem to indicate that the Jays intend to sign 2 catchers to minor league deals.
[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 07:59 PM EST (#337461) #
That post was written as if you think the GM personally drafts anyone after the first round.

Well Parker ... the GM does assemble the draft team and plays a key role in the direction the draft team takes.  And of course, AA garnered multiple extra picks for his team.  

Also, the top employees in the scouting department have been fired - Brian Parker, the amateur scouting director and the national crosschecker Bruce Davis.  Not sure who you are referring to when you talk about the team retaining their employees, unless you mean the ground-level scouts that were hired during AA's splurge on scouting. 

AA's draft track record is superior to Shapiro's, and by a wide margin. 

"Abandoned" is a pretty loaded term, especially given that AA, the most successful GM we have had in 20+ years, had an arguably less successful administrator hired above him.

Pubster, since 2000, the Indians have had 90+ win teams 6 times ... they have had 78 or fewer wins the same number or times.  Their winning percentage over that era is just over .500.  Impressive for a team with limited resources.  TBD if this approach is the right one for a team with as many financial resources as we have.  Regardless of people's opinions of Rogers, even at the low end of our 'financial parameters' we have more money than Cleveland.  Also, I've posted several times about this, but you can't talk just cherry pick Sanchez and Syndergard without talking about the many prospects that flamed out in the comp range of the draft.  

Maybe I just have a problem with Shapiro for having done nothing about that hideous mascot / team name.  I certainly wouldn't work for Cleveland, on principle alone.  
[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 08:05 PM EST (#337462) #
Ross Atkins is basically a rookie GM and as an American, you can't tell him anything. He doesn't understand Canada. Make the offer that makes you nauseous, but before presenting the offfer, add one year and one million per year. Priorities were scuttled when they signed Morales so early. Right Field was the top priority and Dexter Fowler was their #1 target. Four years at $16.0 Million per year plus option year of $16.0 Million or $4.0 Million buyout might have got it done.
[ Reply to This ]
PeterG - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 08:16 PM EST (#337463) #
What if Fowler was just using the Jays to get a better offer from Cards. It's not as if it hasn't happened before.

The day the contract was announced, MLBTR reported that 2 unnamed major league GM's referred to it as "insane".

It's a good thing that we have people in charge that can think beyond one year. Too many fans see only 2017 and nothing beyond. Can't run a team that way and have any hope of sustained success.
[ Reply to This ]
pubster - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 08:25 PM EST (#337464) #
Since 2000 the Indians have won 90+ games 6 times. Meaning they have been a World Series contender about 37% of the time. Which I think is very impressive considering they are a small market team.

I would definitely take their results over the Jay's results over the same timespan.
[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 08:25 PM EST (#337465) #
There are a fair number of people who view the Fowler deal positively though ...
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 08:28 PM EST (#337466) #
I don't remember when he said it or the exact quote, but I vaguely remember AA himself mentioning that the GM has very little to do with the draft. That's pretty much common sense. Given the other responsibilities that come with the job, there's no way one man would be able to keep track of all those prospects. That's why he hires guys who do the work for him, whether it's AA, Shapiro, or whoever. AA hired good guys (Tinnish in particular).

I don't know what Cleveland's drafting record has to do with anything. Shapiro has plucked more execs from the Red Sox org (Sanders, Cherington, Murov) than Cleveland, and Sanders is replacing Parker as the scouting director. We really have no idea how the team is going to draft going forward, but if there's any org I feel comfortable raiding in terms of the front office right now, it would be Boston's.
[ Reply to This ]
Nigel - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 08:35 PM EST (#337467) #
SK - do we really know that this FO is intent on rebuilding the farm system? I'm sure all FO's would like to do that but I think the only evidence supporting that locally is the recent Cuban signing. There haven't been any vet for prospect deals from this FO. Other than being incredibly risk averse, I really have zero handle on this FO's philosophy. Even if you squint and say the FO likes prospects, I don't know whether that's actually their philosophy on the best way to build the current Jays or budgetary reality. I think the only thing two offseason's worth of activities tell us is that they would rather spread risk (and reward) over multiple signings rather than go for one large signing.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 08:41 PM EST (#337468) #
what has Shapiro Inc. done to improve our chances beyond 2017, exactly?
[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 08:43 PM EST (#337469) #
Of course, I am very sure the signings of Lourdes Gurriel JR and Kendrys Morales were tied together, because the timing of the second signing went too quick, because why sign people until the new Agreement is reached.
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 09:42 PM EST (#337470) #
Nigel, it's not so much about vet for prospect trades (which they are not in any position to do now, nor should they), but about how they have combined trying to win now with building up the farm system. The Liriano deal is a good example of that where they got a player that could help them short-term but also two prospects that add depth to the system. Guirrel is obviously another one. Now, they did make a pitch for Fowler, which would have cost them their 1st round pick, as well as making an offer to Edwin that would have cost them a comp pick, so they do seem OK with losing a pick for a player they feel is worth it, but it has to be at their price. I think they've done a good job balancing both objectives.
[ Reply to This ]
Nigel - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 10:15 PM EST (#337471) #
I thInk it's impossible to successfully play the plan for now and plan for the future game unless you have limitless resources like the Dodgers. That is exactly my problem with the front office. I think they needed to decide if they were playing for now and go for it or, also acceptable, decide to plan for the future. They've chosen neither. More likely, Rogers has decided on neither. They haven't improved the team for 2017 and done little to improve for after 2017. I'm ok with going for it or rebuilding- thinking they can have it all with the current roster isn't a viable option with the current roster and minor league system. There is time though.
[ Reply to This ]
Mike D - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 10:55 PM EST (#337472) #
We are on the heels of 2 consecutive playoff appearances. Virtually any team will take a step back after that.

Hey! We can measure that! Response to come in a few minutes...
[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 11:07 PM EST (#337473) #
I don't remember when he said it or the exact quote, but I vaguely remember AA himself mentioning that the GM has very little to do with the draft. That's pretty much common sense

You 'vaguely remember' AA saying something and that's your evidence for the GM having very little to do with the draft - "that's pretty much common sense"?

I don't know what Cleveland's drafting record has to do with anything. Shapiro has plucked more execs from the Red Sox org (Sanders, Cherington, Murov) than Cleveland, and Sanders is replacing Parker as the scouting director. We really have no idea how the team is going to draft going forward, but if there's any org I feel comfortable raiding in terms of the front office right now, it would be Boston's.

You don't know what Cleveland's draft record has to do with a discussion about how to develop our team, with a FO prioritizing building from the draft?  

And your argument for Sanders replacing Parker is that the Red Sox are good? 

[ Reply to This ]
Mike D - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 11:09 PM EST (#337474) #
Cot's Baseball Contracts tracks year-over-year Opening Day payrolls since 2000.

Since that time, there have been 33 occasions where a team has made the playoffs for two consecutive years after missing the prior year. For apples to apples, I'd like to compare teams whose attendance spiked by more than 400K in each of the two years...but only the 2015-16 Blue Jays did that.

So here are the 10 teams whose attendance increased by more than 100K in each of their two playoff years, and their subsequent payroll decision.

2010-11 Rangers: plus 349K, plus 442K, 16 home playoff dates
2012 Rangers: plus $28.7M payroll

2012-13 Athletics: plus 202K, plus 194K, 5 home playoff dates
2014 Athletics: plus $20.4M payroll

2014-15 Royals: plus 206K, plus 752K, 16 home playoff dates
2016 Royals: plus $18.6M payroll

2013-14 Pirates: plus 165K, plus 186K, 4 home playoff dates
2015 Pirates: plus $18.1M payroll

2009-10 Twins: plus 114K, plus 807K, 3 home playoff dates
2011 Twins: plus $15.6M payroll

2011-12 Tigers: plus 181K, plus 386K, 12 home playoff dates
2013 Tigers: plus $15.2M payroll

2007-08 Phillies: plus 407K, plus 314K, 9 home playoff dates
2009 Phillies: plus $14.7M payroll

2012-13 Reds: plus 134K, plus 145K, 2 home playoff dates
2014 Reds: plus $7.3M payroll

2000-01 Athletics: plus 169K, plus 530K, 5 home playoff dates
2002 Athletics: plus $6.2M payroll

2004-05 Cardinals: plus 138K, plus 491K, 13 home playoff dates
2006 Cardinals: minus $3.2M payroll

2015-16 Blue Jays: plus 419K, plus 597K, 11 home playoff dates
2017 Blue Jays: TBA

So of the 10 prior teams, one shed payroll, two had a modest increase in payroll and seven gave their team a substantial increase in payroll. Ironically, the one cheap-out team, the '06 Cardinals, went on to win the World Series, albeit after winning 83 games. Anybody willing to bet that 83 wins would earn the 2017 Jays a playoff berth?

I think the most comparable situation to the Jays in terms of meteoric rise in attendance and excitement was the 2010-11 Rangers. Granted, both of those Texas teams made the World Series. But the Rangers didn't crack 3 million fans until 2012, while the Jays nearly made it to 3.4 million in 2016.
[ Reply to This ]
whiterasta80 - Monday, January 09 2017 @ 11:37 PM EST (#337475) #
Mike, I meant performance wide, not necessarily salary
[ Reply to This ]
Michael - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 06:11 AM EST (#337476) #
Nice data Mike D. I expect it is even more stark if you do it in percent change to team payroll, or measure the amount of the change in terms of the league average payroll. Since some of those changes were 10-15 years back. So a true comparable, in addition to the greater increase in attendance the Jays have would also need to account for the increase in contract spending through out the league and would make the Jays expected baseline change even larger.

The Jays owners are a company with a net worth of around $20B with healthy profit margins. If they can afford to waste more than $500M on failed IPTV efforts, I'm sure they can afford to add quality top of the line free agents when presented with a playoff caliber team and willing fan base.
[ Reply to This ]
ISLAND BOY - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 07:29 AM EST (#337477) #
These are the win-loss records of the teams mentioned by Mike D. Previous years record is in brackets.

2012 Rangers 93-69 ( 96-66 )

2014 A's 88-74 ( 96-66 )

2016 Royals 81-81 ( 95-67 )

2015 Pirates 98-64 ( 88-74 )

2011 Twins 63-99 ( 94-68 )

2013 Tigers 93-69 ( 88-74 )

2009 Phillies 93-69 ( 92-70 )

2014 Reds 76-86 ( 90-72 )

2002 A's 103-59 ( 102-60 )

2006 Cardinals 83-78 ( 100-62 )
[ Reply to This ]
85bluejay - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 07:47 AM EST (#337478) #
Interesting data, Mike D - for me, the important question would be did any of those teams lose significant players without adequately replacing them with similarly valued talent via FA,Trades or prospects. Also, increased spending will probably depend on team control issues - the jays had about 9 FA including some core guys, without internal talent ready to replace them and needed to spend to obtain similar talent - some of the teams in that list probably didn't need to increase spending because players were under control or the team had quality prospects ready to play.
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 07:59 AM EST (#337479) #
I think you can play both sides (win now and build for the future). It will be tougher for the Jays with a self-imposed cap on spending, but every team aside from the Dodgers has one, so they just have to work around it. I think it's better to make "go for it" free agent signings or trades when the team has a core of young controllable players (see Red Sox, Cubs). The moment a team has expendable assets is when they are usually in pretty good shape, and the Jays simply don't have them, or have enough of them.

Regardless, the team has made the playoffs two straight years with a huge boom in attendance, revenue, ratings, etc. They can't rebuild even if they wanted to, and there's really no reason to, IMO. If things look bleak mid-season 2017, then they could do what the Yankees did in the summer of 2016, but they don't have to scorch earth. As of now if they add a couple of 2 win calibre pieces to the roster, they could bump themselves up to the 85-87 win projection range, and that should be enough to stay competitive while still emphasizing long-term development.
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 08:17 AM EST (#337480) #
"You 'vaguely remember' AA saying something and that's your evidence for the GM having very little to do with the draft - "that's pretty much common sense"?"


How in the world was I presenting AA's quote as 'evidence' of anything? I mentioned I vaguely remembered him mentioning it. I have no interest in looking it up so you can believe me or not. I won't lose sleep if you don't. Regardless, it's common sense either way. If you believe a GM (or team president in Shapiro's case) has the time or resources to know enough about amateur prospects to be responsible for much of the draft picks, maybe other than the first round, then there's not much to discuss here. They hire scouting directors and scouts in general for a reason.





"You don't know what Cleveland's draft record has to do with a discussion about how to develop our team, with a FO prioritizing building from the draft?

And your argument for Sanders replacing Parker is that the Red Sox are good? "



The Cleveland drafts were with different scouting teams, so yes, until we get a sense of how this regime is going to draft, it's pretty much pointless to look at Cleveland's draft picks (even though their current team looks pretty good).

The Jays 2016 draft was with Parker. Was there a noticeable difference to you? Do you honestly believe that Atkins chose the prospects and Parker was there just for appearances sake? I'm not sure what you are arguing.

And no, bringing up the Boston execs heading to Toronto was to dispel this notion that the Jays are going to mirror the Cleveland regime, which appears to be the narrative for some. The front office may act in a similar way, but the drafting is still going to be a wait-and-see.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 08:28 AM EST (#337481) #
Thanks for the research, MikeD and Islandboy. good stuff.
[ Reply to This ]
Glevin - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 09:36 AM EST (#337482) #
Why stop there? Look at these teams two years down the road after increasing their payroll.

2014 Rangers 67-95

2016 A's 69-93

2018 Royals (unknown but very likely to be bad)

2017 Pirates Unknown but almost certainly worse.

2013 Twins 66-96

2015 Tigers 74-87

2011 Phillies 102-60

2014 Reds 68-94

2004 A's 91-71

2010 Cardinals 86-76

Average wins in second winning year- 94.1
In year after (with increasing salary) -87.1
3 years after-77.9
Jays had 89 wins last year, where does that pattern go? By percentage, the answer is 80.2 and then 71.7

Of course this is ludicrous because every team and every situation is different. Some teams have a young core worth building around for five years. Some teams have very limited budgets, some teams have major free agents leaving, etc...But teams that try to hold on to winning when they don't have the right roster for it, find out there is a long-term cost to that.
[ Reply to This ]
pubster - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 10:07 AM EST (#337483) #
"what has Shapiro Inc. done to improve our chances beyond 2017, exactly?"

Well he didn't sign Price for 10 years.
[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 10:29 AM EST (#337484) #
I thInk it's impossible to successfully play the plan for now and plan for the future game unless you have limitless resources like the Dodgers

Most teams take a middle ground.  Take the usage of Aaron Sanchez last year.  The "plan for now" would have been to just give him a start every 5 days and let him roll.  The "plan for the future" would have been to shut him down after 170-180 innings total.  The club chose the middle ground. 

Allocation of resources is the same.  The major issue for me is the size of the pot, not how it is split up. 
[ Reply to This ]
whiterasta80 - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 10:49 AM EST (#337485) #
Thank you glevin. I was just about to make the same point.
[ Reply to This ]
Mike D - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 10:56 AM EST (#337486) #
The crazy thing is that the team leaked, through Rick Westhead in December, a $165M budget for 2017, which if spent would have nearly matched the 2011-12 Rangers' payroll bump precisely (a $28.2M bump compared to the Texas $28.7 bump). From a bean-counting perspective, it looks like the math played out similarly across those two franchises at a similar decision point if that story is (or was) accurate.

But the hardball/lowball/"value" negotiating strategy with the likes of Fowler and Edwin means that the Jays almost certainly won't spend what they have purportedly been allocated. We will obviously never know whether that is front office conservatism or ownership mandate...or whether that leaked budget was bona fide.
[ Reply to This ]
sweat - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 11:36 AM EST (#337487) #
I'd guess that if the Jays and Indians switched divisions, the Jays would have had 90+ wins 6 or more times as well.
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 11:56 AM EST (#337488) #
Rasmus signed with the Rays for 1/5 with $2M in possible incentives. That is a very cheap deal. He was by far the best defensive player available with enough upside with the bat to at least be a strong platoon option. Surprised he got that low.

If that's any indication of how the OF market is going to play out, then the Jays might be able to afford Bautista (if they want him) and someone like Moss in addition to other needs like back-up catcher.
[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 12:11 PM EST (#337489) #
The crazy thing is that the team leaked, through Rick Westhead in December, a $165M budget for 2017,

Was it a leak or a 'planned Release'? It certainly cooled the angst for a time.
[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 12:14 PM EST (#337490) #
Serious question: what percentage of players would prefer playing in Tampa to playing in Toronto?  I really have no idea what the answer is.

That is a low contract price for Rasmus.
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 12:35 PM EST (#337491) #
My hunch is that Rasmus would have played anywhere other than Toronto, but that's still a pretty low price for him. He only got slightly more than Ben Revere who is coming off injury plus a horrible season. Either he underestimated his value or the FA market for OF's is going to be dirt cheap.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 12:44 PM EST (#337492) #
Hey, wasn't Westhead also the guy who leaked the refuted Bautista contract demands?
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 12:48 PM EST (#337493) #
Rasmus wasn't exactly great last year either, though nowhere near as bad as Revere.

Rasmus did say that playing on the turf was really hard on his body.

Hey, on a related note, when was that real grass thing supposed to happen at Skydome?
[ Reply to This ]
CeeBee - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 01:59 PM EST (#337494) #
2057?
[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 03:28 PM EST (#337495) #
Grass will cost about what it costs to rebuild the Stadium from the ground up.

A Corporate Department loss of $250 K monthly might just be an acceptable part of each month's normal/permissible operating procedures. Yet a one time loss of just $2.0 Million will set off alarm bells.

Continually fixing things has a manageable regular cost. Replacing things has a huge one time price. One can be budgeted for while the other can't.

To put it in perspective, grass isn't in the budget. A one time expenditure will be needed.
[ Reply to This ]
pubster - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 03:43 PM EST (#337496) #
I think Rogers spent something like $550 million to buy 37.5% of MLSE.

I'm sure they can spend the money to put in grass if they believe it's a good investment.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 04:04 PM EST (#337497) #
The arguments against the Blue Jays being able to sign free agents are three-fold:

1) Canadian taxes

2) Canadian culture?

3) Turf vs. grass

Rogers can only control one of the three. Like pubster said, it'll happen if Rogers thinks it's profitable. I doubt they will. Rogers commissioned a study to look into how much it would cost, and as Richard S.S. said, it's going to cost more than what Rogers paid for the stadium.

It seems obvious this would be another argument in favour of developing in-house talent rather than massively overpaying to draw free agents.
[ Reply to This ]
92-93 - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 04:27 PM EST (#337498) #
The agents for Saunders and Moss can't be too happy about that Rasmus deal. What is the most they get now, 8m guaranteed?

As the offseason moves along, it's becoming clear that the Jays really need to be right on their assessments of Pearce & Morales, because they gave each of them one year too many of guaranteed $.
[ Reply to This ]
lexomatic - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 04:38 PM EST (#337499) #
A Corporate Department loss of $250 K monthly might just be an acceptable part of each month's normal/permissible operating procedures. Yet a one time loss of just $2.0 Million will set off alarm bells.

It's a capital asset and would absolutely be amortized, so, 1) it's not a loss, and 2) it wouldn't be felt in one quarter.

Mostly irrelevant, but I think your reasoning doesn't hold up. I don't disagree with the conclusion though.
[ Reply to This ]
John Northey - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 05:04 PM EST (#337500) #
The challenge each winter for MLB teams. Do you sign guys quick and hope to get a solid guy at a good price or do you wait and hope for a bargain risking getting nothing or a poor choice at an inflated price. I think the challenge is deciding which parts of the market are flooded each winter. Power hitting DH/outfielders didn't seem to be an overflow at the start but it turns out it was with Bautista, Lind, Napoli, Trumbo, Franklin Gutierrez, Saunders and others I'm sure I'm missing who are unsigned still.

It'll be interesting to see what the Jays end up with come April.
[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 05:10 PM EST (#337501) #
The Jays 2016 draft was with Parker. Was there a noticeable difference to you? Do you honestly believe that Atkins chose the prospects and Parker was there just for appearances sake?

No, I think you are right on this point.  

This draft was actually a bit unusual for the Jays - 5 position players in the top 7 picks, and fewer HS / upside type picks than usual - but I wouldn't say it was different enough to argue that Atkins had anything significant to do with it.  It'll be next year's draft, with Sanders at the helm, that indicates if there is a philosophical change in draft strategy. 

Under AA, the draft team had a high-risk, high-reward approach which has lead to some major helium picks emerging as stars.  Under JPR it was a conservative approach emphasizing university players closer to the bigs, with no star talent produced whatsoever (cecil, Lind and Hill are likely the 'best' picks of his tenure).  Under Shapiro as GM, Cleveland had very poor draft results - although I haven't followed them closely enough to have a sense of their strategy, when Jeremy Guthrie is one of the best players picked in your tenure, it's a bad sign.  He was GM for around a decade - even if it was his employees screwing up, he could've overhauled the draft team.  Granted, Cleveland has drafted much more effectively since Shapiro became president. 

I think it's entirely fair to say that the results reflect positively on AA and negatively on JPR and Shapiro.  Of course, the GM isn't deciding which specific player to draft in the 5th round, but he has hired a team that understands, shares and implements his vision. 
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 06:22 PM EST (#337502) #
Is the turf at the RC worse than the one at the Trop?
The info I saw online seems to indicate that the Jays have upgraded the turf a couple of times from the stuff they still use in Tampa. They had a dirt infield first. So what?

[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 06:36 PM EST (#337503) #
with Bautista, Lind, Napoli, Trumbo, Franklin Gutierrez, Saunders and others I'm sure I'm missing who are unsigned still.

Chris Carter and Pedro Alvarez.

And the Mets are still trying to get someone to take Bruce's 13M contract and return them something useful.

And the Twins are still trying to unload Dozier.

And a lot of teams are probably willing to trade guys in their last year and resign somebody else for cheaper.
[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 07:06 PM EST (#337504) #
It's extremely hard to determine where the money goes, but there are two ways of bringing grass to the Dome. To do that they must establish drainage, as the Skydome neglected to do ever. I don't know if Rogers Center has done so yet. With mould a serious consideration, to ignore it seems foolish or worse.

1)To bring it in permanently means massive lighting and ventilation changes and maybe a dome change. This is massively expensive, but once done costs get reduced to just high.

2)They could bring in dirt and overlay with sod and water well. In a week, you've got a playing field. Replace as necessary. This will eventually exceed the cost of number 1.

3)Build a new Baseball-only facility with a movable dome and an all grass field. Might be the plan 10 years or more from now. This might be their best bargain.
[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 07:13 PM EST (#337505) #
Is the turf at the RC worse than the one at the Trop?
Tampa's turf is stuff sprayed on concrete and had a very limited run. When asked how you get it up? The market died. Tampa didn't ask since it was almost free.
[ Reply to This ]
dalimon5 - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 07:58 PM EST (#337506) #
A lot of definitive statements being made regarding the grass. It's a subject I've been following closely with the hope of real grass by 2018. Doesn't look like that will happen, but there haven't been any updates on the many statements and timeline that has been out there. Here are some notes on the subject:

*Field Turf is supposed to be the best artificial surface to play on. Astroturf, the major competitor to Field Turf, inked a sponsoring/partnership with MLB and installed free AstroTurf 3D and AstroTurf 3D Xtreme playing fields (plays slowest) at Tropicana Field and Rogers Centre.

*Eric Lyons of Guelph University was hired to find a grass to grow inside the Rogers Centre.

* Stephen Brooks and Paul Beeston are no longer running the Business Operations of the Blue Jays and both would speak openly about trying to get natural grass in the Rogers Centre.

* Rogers Centre pre 2016 was not able to be opened when temperatures were below 15 celcius because the wheels and rails on the roof were so old. That was replaced in 2016 and allows the Dome to be opened in cooler temperatures...wild card game against Baltimore was the coldest open roof game at the Dome in franchise history, I think.
-----> opening the Dome relates to how much light can be brought in naturally during the day at the Dome, even though the rest of the building is not built for colder temperatures (piping, drainage, humidity, etc)

* I've read (perhaps at Andrewstoen.com) that the water pipes feeding the condos below Front Street would all have to be re-routed if the Jays removed the parking lot and added drainage for real grass. That would put something like 10K people out of service for however long it took to reroute the pipes (tearing up roads and what not).


Here are some links:

Field Turf vs Astro Turf
http://www.fieldturf.com/en/artificial-turf/artificial-turf-news/fieldturf-tropicana-field-replacement/

The Star Brendan Kennedy Timeline
https://www.thestar.com/sports/bluejays/2015/12/17/rogers-centre-turf-timeline.html

CBC Article w/ some Eric Lyons Quotes
http://www.cbc.ca/radio/day6/episode-279-playing-ball-on-grass-vs-turf-taytweets-big-fail-narco-subs-fake-food-and-more-1.3514966/can-you-actually-grow-grass-inside-the-rogers-centre-1.3515036






[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 08:04 PM EST (#337507) #
Major helium stars like Deck McGuire?
[ Reply to This ]
bpoz - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 08:19 PM EST (#337508) #
Deck McGuire VS Chris Sale. Both University pitching draft picks. Jays had the higher pick and chose McGuire.
But the category was the same. Not HS or College batter or HS pitcher. Some teams seem to have a trend.

I think the Reds go for a HS position player almost always. Or used to.
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 09:02 PM EST (#337509) #
Thanks Dalimon5
[ Reply to This ]
PeterG - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 09:10 PM EST (#337510) #
I don't think drafting is a major issue one way or the other. It is a crap shoot. Sometimes a small scouting advantage can be gained. The big gains can occur in the developmental system. Under the last 3 regimes, the Jays had poor player development. Major upgrades have been made in that area in the past year. We don't like John Farrell here but he was correct when he said that Jays were a scouting team, not a development team. That has been the most significant change for the better under the new admin. Not only are more resources being provided for prospects but they are now regarded as future Jays as opposed to only currency.
[ Reply to This ]
92-93 - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 09:27 PM EST (#337511) #
This notion of big changes to the player development system is one that you have espoused numerous times this offseason PeterG, but I'm having difficulty finding any sourcing for it on the internet. Do you know of any good stories that were written on the subject? I remember some hype about Shapiro fixing Dunedin, so I want to understand if this is just a matter of the Jays catching up to speed with the rest of MLB or if it's an actual organizational philosophy to allocate *significant* resources towards development. I hope this isn't a matter of the Jays adding a few extra coaches to the staff.

When Anthopoulos took over we heard the same old song and dance about how the previous regime wasn't doing things right and that the new one would be re-dedicating its focus.
[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 09:29 PM EST (#337512) #
Sometimes you ask what is better, in-house talent or Free Agent?

Devon Travis has spent most of the last two years on the D.L. and earned about a Million Dollars. Josh Donaldson will earn $17.0 Million in his third of four arb years, and is underpaid. The young stud ace of our staff hires Boras Corp, no extensions here. You need all the young and cheap talent you can find in any way possible. Just be advised they can get expensive quick. You need the very best talent you can acquire in any way. Then you fill in holes with the best you can afford. Currently Roberto Osuna, Joe Biagini, Aaron Sanchez, Marcus Stroman, Devon Travis and Kevin Pillar are the young and cheap talent that's getting expensive. Josh Donaldson, Russell Martin and Troy Tulowitzki are the very best (still) talent acquired. Everything else is filling in the holes.

Every Offseason there will be holes to fill and you'll know what you have to spend. The biggest problem is trying for bargains all the time, that smacks of desperation, is that sometimes you only get what you pay for.

Blue Jay Targets:
Brett Cecil: 4 years, $30.5 Million; the 2nd best LHP available and more than a step above his competition.
Josh Redick: 4 years, $52.0 Million; LHB, ideal selection for platoon with Upton and defensively responsible.
Dexter Fowler: 5 years, $82.5 Million; SW, can play Center well, if needed, but RF very well, good hitter.

If you don't sign Kendrys Morales, go one more year than they did and add $1.0 Million more per year than they did for each of the above; doing it at the GM's Meetings. Do you sign them all? I think you get at least two. That might still have left money for more.
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 10:43 PM EST (#337513) #
Shapiro implemented a high performance department (hiring Angus Mugford as the "director of high performance"). They have definitely made changes and added resources to the player development side of things, which should hopefully help in developing prospects over time.

This article is from March 2016.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/mlb/blue-jays-high-performance-department-hopes-change-game/
[ Reply to This ]
92-93 - Tuesday, January 10 2017 @ 11:35 PM EST (#337514) #
Pretty fluffy propaganda from the media side of the team, but thanks for sharing. It's fun to be reminded of what people were writing about Bautista's Fortune 500 body less than a year ago.

They're kicking in a whopping 15m to revamp Dunedin apparently.
[ Reply to This ]
observer2010 - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 12:43 AM EST (#337515) #
I don't see Cecil as a big loss. Perhaps he was one of the best left handed relief pitchers available, in a very weak free agent market, and he posted some impressive strikeout numbers.

But he was maddeningly inconsistent, with long hot and cold streaks, and he had disabled list visits in each of the last four seasons. John Gibbons kept going back to him, perhaps in part because his other left handed short options were worse.

$30 million over four years seems a bit much, and I don't blame the Jays for offering him less.
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 06:51 AM EST (#337516) #
You can't do a fair assessment of drafting because the rules have changed so much.
High school players drafted by a small market team are now much more likely to sign than before when they just made it clear they wanted several millions.

[ Reply to This ]
whiterasta80 - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 07:10 AM EST (#337517) #
I'm not paying Cecil, Reddick, or Fowler what they got let alone more. And that's with a full willingness to overpay for free agent talent.

I would have considered breaking the bank for a Cespedes or Jansen but they both went to arguably better situations.
[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 08:24 AM EST (#337518) #
Major helium stars like Deck McGuire?

No, like the two major helium picks- Sanchez and Syndergaard - picked right after the 'safe' Deck McGuire pick - he has a low ceiling and a low floor and was considered a solid pick at the spot.  His low floor allowed the org to take risks with their remaining first rounders.

You can cherry pick exceptions to every draft team philosophy.  But we can do simple evaluations aside from plunging into the individual draft reviews and player profiles - add up the WAR of players picked during the JPR, AA and Shapiro GM regimes - the Jays are far and away the leader, which clearly dispels some of the "Jays couldn't develop players under AA" meme.  We developed plenty - of pitching - because AA focused on pitching with his draft philosophy.  If you want to believe that a John Anderson becomes a quality player under a different regime, fine, but his career has been racked with injuries - just to cherry pick an example.  You have to look at the evidence on the whole. 

Not to mention that we drafted and traded plenty of highly regarded prospects for big-league talent - Marisnick and Nicolino in the Florida trade come to mind as does D'Arnaud with the Mets - that stalled out in their development with different orgs.  
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 08:41 AM EST (#337519) #
jerjapan, it's fair to criticize Shapiro's drafting history in Cleveland but my point was simply that different scouting directors will have different views on talent. So what Cleveland did in the 2000's isn't necessarily the type of drafting strategy that the Jays will implement with Sanders in 2017-beyond. With the changes in the way the draft is structured, it's really apples and oranges to compare it to 10-20 years ago anyway.

AA hired good people to oversee his drafts. The jury is still out on Sanders, but like I said, when you look at the talent Boston has accumulated over the past few years, I'm very comfortable with raiding their front office guys.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 09:08 AM EST (#337520) #
It's fun to be reminded of what people were writing about Bautista's Fortune 500 body less than a year ago.

I really think Bautista's injury problems are due to mental errors, not poor conditioning. He hurt his shoulder when he was throwing angry. Both his lower-body injuries were from awkward attempts to field balls that were clearly out of reach. I'm sure the Jays have a decent sports psychology department, but the player has to listen. If I'm Bautista I'm probably thinking, "This is what I've been doing my whole career and look where it's gotten me - I'll be damned if I'm going to change now just because some egghead tells me to."

I've said it before - I don't like Bautista, but I have tremendous respect for his intense competitiveness. I can easily see how that'd make him try to play harder when he knows he's slowing down with age. I have little doubt Bautista would stay a lot healthier if someone could convince him to "play within himself" or however the cliche goes. I just don't think Bautista's built that way, though.
[ Reply to This ]
Spifficus - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 09:12 AM EST (#337521) #
Isn't a helium guy a late-riser (like Syndergaard, and if I recall right, Gabryszewski) someone that comes on late in the draft year with some newly-developed or dramatically improved skill? This causes them to shoot up draft boards, and because public info is stale compared to the scouting world, it gets missed. Hence the helium / quick-riser. Sanchez didn't really have that massive jump, he already had a good fastball-curveball combo wrapped in a projectable frame and easy delivery.
[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 09:54 AM EST (#337522) #
There's a new type of surgery for elbow ligament repair with a recovery time that may be significantly shorter than TJ.  Will we be calling it Jeff Maness surgery or JM surgery in 10 years?  Maybe. 
[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 10:00 AM EST (#337523) #
Spifficus, that's the description of helium I was using. Syndergaard is definitely the better example of a helium guy compared to Sanchez, but I do recall him being a riser himself - typical for the HS picks. I can't be definitive though, so I'll stick to calling Thor a helium pick.

SK, it's true the game has changed in terms of drafting pretty significantly, and I do hope Shapiro has learned from his time as GM. Cleveland certainly improved when he moved up to president, and I agree that if you are going with an 'unproven' guy, Boston is a good organization to look at. They've got what I wish we had - a great organization AND a large budget.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 10:02 AM EST (#337524) #
yeah sanchez was hyped early so helium might not apply....but it does apply to many AA prospects.

as for who gets what credit i think AA's draft strategy was pretty clear, pretty unique, and under his control.
[ Reply to This ]
PeterG - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 10:37 AM EST (#337525) #
Speculation from Brunt and Blair that Jays will do something by end of the week. No idea whether FA or trade.
[ Reply to This ]
85bluejay - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 12:24 PM EST (#337526) #
"Speculation from Brunt and Blair that Jays will do Something by end of the week."

Blue Jays announce a select committee to investigate the breakup of the bromance between Marcus Stroman and Alex Sanchez.
[ Reply to This ]
85bluejay - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 12:27 PM EST (#337527) #
and Aaron Sanchez.
[ Reply to This ]
whiterasta80 - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 12:34 PM EST (#337528) #
Waiver claim alert.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 12:39 PM EST (#337529) #
multi-year extension for Upton.
[ Reply to This ]
vw_fan17 - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 12:57 PM EST (#337530) #
multi-year extension for Upton.

If that happens, remind me to set my mlb.tv subscription to NOT auto-renew...
[ Reply to This ]
92-93 - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 01:02 PM EST (#337531) #
Is the 5m the Jays picked up on Upton's contract already paid in 2016 or is it on the 2017 tab? I thought it was 2016, but Cot's has it as 2017. The articles written right after the trade don't make the details clear.
[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 01:43 PM EST (#337532) #
Sportrac has it the same as Cot's. 
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 02:04 PM EST (#337533) #
ah that sucks.
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 02:19 PM EST (#337534) #
I remember reading the Jays would be paying Upton $1M in 2017 and the rest was covered in 2016, but nothing turned up on Google when I searched for it.
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 02:24 PM EST (#337535) #
Nevermind. Found it. From a Shi Davidi article in October.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/mlb/blue-jays-winter-primer-what-comes-next-after-a-solid-run/

"OF Melvin Upton Jr., $1 million (San Diego covers the rest of his $17.05 million salary)."
[ Reply to This ]
92-93 - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 02:51 PM EST (#337536) #
Good catch, thanks for confirming that. I could be a bit off on the arb numbers for Stroman, Barney, Carrera, and Loup, but the Jays project at less than 135m right now.

C Martin 20
1B Smoak 4.125
2B Travis 0.5
3B Donaldson 17
SS Tulo 20
LF Carrera 1.25
CF Pillar 0.5
RF Upton 1
DH Morales 10
IF Barney 1.5
OF Pompey 0.5
C2 MLB FA 1
UT Pearce 6.25

SP Liriano 13
SP Estrada 14
SP Happ 13
SP Stroman 3
SP Sanchez 0.5
RP Grilli 3
RP Loup 1.25
RP Osuna 0.5
RP Biagini 0.5
RP Floyd 1
RP Tepera 0.5
RP Barnes 0.5

134.375
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 02:52 PM EST (#337537) #
Upton is actually a stupidly insane bargain at $1M.
[ Reply to This ]
dan gordon - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 02:55 PM EST (#337538) #
Mike Green - thanks for the article about the new method of repairing the UCL rather than replacing it. Could be the biggest baseball news this offseason. Will be interesting to see how Maness performs this year.
[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 07:40 PM EST (#337539) #
another bullpen arm off the market with Santiago Casilla signing a two year deal with the As.  Sure hope there are some attractive arms left out there when we do finally spend our money.

And Seattle is having one heck of an active offseason ... they might be a legit threat to us for the WC, along with the Yanks. 

http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/okay-now-the-2017-mariners-are-interesting/

[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Wednesday, January 11 2017 @ 09:30 PM EST (#337540) #
I think that Casilla was signed mostly in hope of being traded later.

There's still 4 lefty relievers out there and not that many teams looking to sign one of them.
Including the Mets who might pass if they can't unload Bruce's salary.

I don't know about Seattle. Rotation is pretty iffy. They picked 2 starters who had down years to go along Hernandez who had a down year himself.

They might be looking better than Texas, but if the  A's and the Angels bounce back or if Houston really dominates, it's likely not enough.

[ Reply to This ]
85bluejay - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 08:04 AM EST (#337541) #
In an off-season in which one dimensional sluggers (especially LHH) are being signed for peanuts if at all, a tip of the hat to Kendry Morales agent - He got a team to pony up 3/33 which is looking more and more like the overpay of the winter.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 08:29 AM EST (#337542) #
Actually I think Brett Cecil was the overpay of the winter. Or really, any of those $65M-$90M contracts to relievers.

Morales wasn't a bargain, exactly, but Toronto often has to overpay for free agents in general.
[ Reply to This ]
John Northey - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 10:13 AM EST (#337543) #
$11 per for 3 was more than I'd have liked for Morales but it wasn't crazy at the time. Who knew the outfielder DH 1B market would collapse this winter? While the reliever market would go nutty. I mean most of us would've been happy if Cecil was released mid-season (July 20th 6.75 ERA 0-6 with 3 blown saves, 5 holds, 0 saves followed by 1.74 ERA 1-1 1 Blown Save, 4 holds, 0 saves, overall in high leverage had a 370/412/630 line against vs 180/219/295 in low leverage outings in 2016) now he has a 4 year $30 mil deal. Heck, Marc Rzepczynski got a 2 year $11 mil deal.

Scary how the reliever market went this winter. Meanwhile one of the Jays best last year was a rule 5 pick and the year before was a 20 year old out of A+ ball. Seems insane to me to blow that much on relievers. Even on guys like Chapman ($17 mil per for 5), and Jansen ($16 per for 5) just because relievers are insanely variable year to year with rare exceptions (Rivera).
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 10:28 AM EST (#337544) #
I think versatility is starting to be considered more seriously. With positional versatility for batters you've got your Desmonds and your Zobrists. Starting pitchers have always commanded a giant premium based on the fact that you can slot them into any one of five rotation spots, and signing a better one just pushes the rest one step down the depth chart without impacting their contributions.

Relievers are now being paid a huge premium, maybe because of the same idea - sign two awesome relievers, and they can both still contribute equally, whereas if you sign two premium position players who can't play other positions, one is going to be DH'ed or platooned or sat on the bench. Adding an impact reliever just pushes the worst bullpen arm off the roster.

I know I've been hard on Anthopoulos, but I'm starting to think he might have really nailed that concept by succeeding in exclusively producing pitching talent - Sanchez doesn't take away Stroman's job; he just pushes Stroman one spot down and makes Drew Hutchison expendable. On the other hand, Ricciardi didn't draft Tulowitzki specifically because they already had Hill and (sigh) Adams. If all three of those talents were pitchers and were the best available player in the draft, no regime would ever say, "We just drafted a #1 and #2 SP; we don't need to draft any more pitchers."
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 10:39 AM EST (#337545) #
Yep, you can never have too much pitching, and if by some freak chance you do, you can always trade them for value. And even pitching prospects who don't max out their upside can be very useful backend starters or relievers, while when a position player doesn't reach his he's in tough to get regular playing time. It's a good strategy.

[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 10:41 AM EST (#337546) #
On the other hand, Ricciardi didn't draft Tulowitzki specifically because they already had Hill and (sigh) Adams. If all three of those talents were pitchers and were the best available player in the draft, no regime would ever say, "We just drafted a #1 and #2 SP; we don't need to draft any more pitchers."

If that was the reasoning for not drafting Tulo, it was flawed.  Players drafted as shortstops move everywhere around the diamond by the time that they make it to the majors.  Gary Sheffield was a shortstop.  Hanley Ramirez was a shortstop.  Manny Machado was a shortstop. Mike Schmidt was a shortstop. If you have 4 great shortstop prospects in your organization and no third basemen, that's not a big deal.  If all of your best prospects are corner outfielders and first basemen, that is a problem. 
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 10:42 AM EST (#337547) #
The eagerness to sign Morales just again speaks to the FO's priorities. They're just more excited by the possibility of getting a bargain than by getting the best player available. It's in their DNA.

Hopefully they can keep being the smartest guys in the room and Morales is the new Happ.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 10:56 AM EST (#337548) #
If that was the reasoning for not drafting Tulo, it was flawed. Players drafted as shortstops move everywhere around the diamond by the time that they make it to the majors. Gary Sheffield was a shortstop. Hanley Ramirez was a shortstop. Manny Machado was a shortstop. Mike Schmidt was a shortstop. If you have 4 great shortstop prospects in your organization and no third basemen, that's not a big deal. If all of your best prospects are corner outfielders and first basemen, that is a problem.

Well, yeah. But the further you move a guy left on the defensive spectrum, then a) the better he has to hit to take someone's job, or b) the more he's being wasted as an asset. I suppose the same is true with pitching, because the #1 starter always gets more starts than the #5 starter, and the closer generally gets higher-leverage innings than the mop-up guy, but my point was that when a guy can be moved all over the field to accommodate injuries, days off, age-related declines, he's becoming more and more valuable in the modern baseball market, and it seems like the modern baseball market is starting to view bullpen spots in a similar way.
[ Reply to This ]
85bluejay - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 11:02 AM EST (#337549) #
I'm no Kreskin, but going into the off-season, because of the heroics attributed to relievers in the last 2 post seasons, it was widely speculated that the reliever market was going to be crazy, that relievers were going to get paid - conversely, Jays GM Atkins mentioned in his post season press rounds that the Jays were in good shape despite their pending free agents because their area of need, corner outfield/1B/DH types corresponded with what was plentiful in the FA market.
[ Reply to This ]
christaylor - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 11:35 AM EST (#337550) #
"They're just more excited by the possibility of getting a bargain than by getting the best player available. It's in their DNA."

Oh, c'mon. Do you that you knowing what is in the front office's hearts and minds? Do you think they'd clip coupons for FA? Have you sequenced their genome? Absurd stuff.

The Morales contract is evidence that they believe his future performance will provide as much or more value than the cost of the contract. That's it. Does it even make sense to talk about bargains in the FA markets that aren't 1 year pillow deals? If the FA were truly about bargain hunting they would sign a bunch of those instead of chasing EE, Fowler, and signing Morales.
[ Reply to This ]
bpoz - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 12:16 PM EST (#337551) #
Morales was possibly a package deal. I do not know if that meant a deduction.
[ Reply to This ]
dalimon5 - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 01:59 PM EST (#337552) #
Wholeheartedly agree with Chris here.

Ugly, you get yourself in a whole lot of pickles by making statements and judgments that are entirely subjective and openly inviting to criticism. You're teasing. It makes zero sense to assume that management is motivated by getting a bargain when their track record from last off season speaks to their shrewdness and focus on maximizing value for the dollar, irrespective of dollar amount. For instance, the David Price contract you were clamouring for last year is very unlikely to produce more value than the investments made by this management for Estrada and Happ's contracts. You think that means they are cheap, most people who have an appreciation for value think they are smart.

If you wrote "They're just more excited by the possibility of getting good value than by getting the best player available. It's in their DNA," I don't think anyone would disagree with your post.

This management is clearly a Tampa Bay style approach with increased budget. I believe Shapiro has doled out big contracts (Swisher, Bourn) and learned from his mistakes. I hope management does what AA did by adding amazing talent (Price, Tulo) by trading away prospects, just not so many of our top prospects in one week to save face on the way out the door, which is effectively what AA did. Clarification, I'm not saying he traded away all our prospects to leave the cupboard bare, justour biggest trading chips at the time - Norris, Hoffman.

If this management goes into this season with the current team and they fail as expected with current players through the first 2 months of the season, then hell, I'll be right at the front of the line with the pitchforks. I just don't see that happening though with the budget room they have left.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 02:30 PM EST (#337553) #
I always forget to add IMO. I obviously don't know, but IMO their priorities seem clear to me.

And the thing is it's not even an insult - maybe they are right about being more excited about the bargain than the star. They sure were right last year, at least. I was wrong.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 03:22 PM EST (#337554) #
Since the Shapiro regime has only had one year at the helm, then the "they sure were right last year, at least" qualification seems absurd.

One could say that they've sure been right, period... at least until you have a year of obvious failures to point out that balances against their success so far.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 03:24 PM EST (#337555) #
It's funny I thought my post was a relatively positive one.

I never said they weren't right to do it, just that it seemed clear that's the kind of deal they're eager to pounce on.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 03:32 PM EST (#337556) #
I didn't see anything positive about that post - I saw qualification and hedging. IMO.

Once those value signings that they're so eager to pounce on don't work out, you can make all the fatalistic comments you want. The returns on those signings, by your own admission, have been pretty awesome for the year that Shapiro has been running the show.

Maybe wait until the team actually sucks before posting about how much the team sucks. Your admission about being wrong about last year only reinforces my point - weren't they were going to suck last year, too?

Admitting that you're wrong is a step forward, but learning from what caused you to be wrong is a much bigger step.
[ Reply to This ]
Mylegacy - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 04:11 PM EST (#337557) #
IMO (just to be safe...)

It seems to me, (IMO) that there are at least three separate thought processes in signing players.

The obvious one is value for dollar spent. Normally, this is the dominate idea of every FO.

The second is that a "competitive team" has a serious weakness - say at starter, closer, SS, C, or 3rd. At times the market demands that, given what's available (trade or free agency), you have to overpay what you know the value is just to land a piece you need - and you are forced to go a bit outside your comfort zone as a FO.

The third is that you are a "serious contender," you've already fully spent your allotment from ownership. You have a chance to sign a serious difference maker. BUT - you're not the only team pursuing him. At these times you need to get ownership to throw out the baby and clearly overspend on a piece that "can put you over the top or at least prevent you from falling out of contention."

The yearly (and trading deadline) question is: Where are we on the contending cycle?

Essentially, the REAL ownership question is do we have a billionaire owner who believes (as I do): "What's a billion among friends." Or - do we have an ownership that is there to run a responsible and fiscally sustainable business and reward their SHAREHOLDERS with value (increasing value of the franchise and or dividends). Their fans are just the tools at the gates who buy their generic phosphate boxed as "Irish Spring." They respect the fans. They just don't respect them as much as those who OWN their businesses - the stock holders.

Now let me think - which type of owners have we?
[ Reply to This ]
mathesond - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 04:16 PM EST (#337558) #
Oh goody, Parker & uglyone are giving each other life lessons again.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 05:10 PM EST (#337559) #
There's some stuff happening in baseball, too.
[ Reply to This ]
greenfrog - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 05:25 PM EST (#337560) #
If I had to choose sides in uglyone versus Parker, I would side with uglyone, for reasons of substance and style. But maybe the two of them could do battle privately via text message instead of on the Box?
[ Reply to This ]
dalimon5 - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 05:50 PM EST (#337561) #
No point in choosing sides, that's not what the Box is about. It's clear to me that both like to have the last word, though Ugly doesn't seem as concerned about beating a dead horse so much as defending himself. I like Uglys persistence (and when he's not belaboring the regime] he brings pretty great info and insights into the convo, even if he cooks the systems to pad his arguments.


Anybody else feel like one of Pillar/Stroman could be moved soon? Stroman is at a near elite level in some metrics and now would be the time to sell high. Same with Pillar...cant see how his defense doesn't decline with age, even if he improves with the bat. Jays need lefty hitters. Trade Stroman for someone like Dahl (more control), sign a platoon bat for outfield, sign or trade for a pitcher (Ross, don't know which SP's to target via trade). Trade Devon Travis while he's hot too.

Maybe its the silence ...
[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 05:53 PM EST (#337562) #
I tend to agree with almost all of Ugly's criticisms of the current FO, but I also happily admit to being wrong about the last offseason - Happ and Biagini were great moves that more than make up for the Chavez trade - disliked it then, dislike it more in hindsight.  Storen and Morales didn't work out but I was fine with them both at the time.  Estrada was a good resigning, but i still see him as more of an AA acquisition. 

The FO was pretty good in-season too - Liriano + prospects might even be a steal, Upton, Grilli and Benoit were basically free - only the Feldman trade and Smoak move looked bad to me at the time and with the benefit of hindsight.

But I don't see how anyone could argue that the Morales move wasn't an overpay at this point in the offseason.  He got more than predicted in a market when pretty much everyone in his position got less.  That's on the FO - even if he does turn out to be a good sign, their job is not to be surprised by the FA market.  I hated that move the moment it happened and have been talked into giving it a chance by some thoughtful posters round here. 

I think pretty much everyone likes the Pearce and Guriel deals - I certainly do.

But it's not at all unreasonable to worry that not much more will come this offseason.  Time is running out - I've been saying this for weeks, and while I still hope to be wrong, i don't see it.  The new FO seems to lack creativity - I've said this before too - and I think the refusal to budge on Jose and EE is evidence of that.  The way the market played out, both players represent better value to Toronto than anyone else, and we look to be about to miss out on some real value.   My perception of this lack of creativity is why I can't see Stro, Pillar or Travis being moved either - it's too outside the box for the FO IMO.

The question really seems to be - are we just not willing to go beyond our price-point for FAs, or are we actually going to be able to score value signings by spring training / the start of the season?  If we do, I will be happy to be wrong again!

Pitchers and catchers will start reporting to Spring training in just over a month ...



[ Reply to This ]
dalimon5 - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 06:23 PM EST (#337563) #
Assuming the Jays land an outfielder or resign Bautista for RF, who are the best FA options to platoon with Melvin Upton?
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 06:28 PM EST (#337564) #
"Admitting that you're wrong is a step forward, but learning from what caused you to be wrong is a much bigger step."

I know exactly why I was wrong.

Happ had by far the best year of his career at age 33, and Price had his (superficially) worst at age 30.

That's not a bigger step. or even a big step.
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 06:35 PM EST (#337565) #
Well, the Yankees got Holliday for 13M. Steamer thinks he bounces back to 1.8 WAR, but I don't know if he'll regress positively at 37.

The Sox got Moreland for 5.5M. Streamer projects 0.6 WAR.

When it comes to DH/1B, teams prefer left handed options.

I think the FO likes balanced lineups. And prospects.

Speaking of prospects:

UPDATE: Scheduled to appear at the Bisons' Hot Stove Prospect Showcase are SS Richard Urena (MLB.com #1, BA #5), OF Anthony Alford (BA #2, MLB.com #3), RHP Sean Reid-Foley (MLB.com #2, BA #3), RHP Conner Greene (BA #4, MLB.com #10), 1B Rowdy Tellez (BA #6, MLB.com #9), C Reese McGuire (MLB.com #4), INF Jon Berti, LHP Ryan Borucki, RHP Wil Browning, LHP Tim Mayza, and RHP Glenn Sparkman.

[ Reply to This ]
92-93 - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 06:35 PM EST (#337566) #
Before the offseason I was hoping the FO could pull off their goal of getting more left-handed and athletic by trading Pillar and/or Travis for similar cost-controllable talent while retaining the boppers. That's obviously not entirely possible anymore, but there are ways to revamp the roster with some creativity instead of waiting out the FA market and seeing what falls into your lap.

I'd trade anybody but Donaldson.
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 07:09 PM EST (#337567) #
Barney signed for 2.888M.
That leaves Loup, Carrera and Stroman.

[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 08:51 PM EST (#337568) #
Mayza and Browning are 2 relievers that have some remote chances of pitching in the Blue Jays pen in 2017.
Mayza is a lefty with a solid 95 mph fastball.  Browning is a sidearm strike out machine.

It's also nice to see that they are not losing anything time with Sparkman.

[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 09:21 PM EST (#337569) #
Maybe we will finally see some activity after all the arbitration eligible players have signed, or in Stroman's case both sides have exchanged numbers (assuming they can't agree to a deal).

I wonder what they are going to do with Carrera. He can't hit righties, so having him and Upton on the roster is redundant in that sense, and Upton's a better player overall. If both are on the roster on opening day, then it means they are either going with 5 OF's (assuming they sign/acquire two) or one of the two is going to be starting. Neither scenario sounds any good.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Thursday, January 12 2017 @ 11:20 PM EST (#337570) #
It might be a case of throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks.

Hopefully it doesn't take half the season to figure out that neither one is any good... I'm really hoping that a bounce-back from Upton forces the team's hand, because otherwise Gibbons is going to keep on giving Carrera way more playing time than he deserves.

Is anyone else surprised at how much Barney got? I mean, he's still a much better bargain than Smoak, but I would've thought he'd be get paid closer to $1.8M than $2.8M.
[ Reply to This ]
dan gordon - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 02:38 AM EST (#337571) #
Barney made $2.3 million in 2014 and $2.5 million in 2015, so the $2.9 million he got isn't really a surprise IMO. Compare to Ryan O'Flaherty, who is about the same age, got his contract today as well, and fills the same role as Barney. Barney is a better player, and is only getting just over a million a year more than O'Flaherty. Barney has a career WAR of 10, O'Flaherty, 2, in about half as many PA's as Barney.
[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 03:39 AM EST (#337572) #
The pin will drop this weekend and the dominos will fall. The Jays have just too much to do to waste much more time. Who they acquire for RF will be a surprise. If he hits Left or Switch Hits, then finding a LHP is all that's left to do immediately. If he hits Right, the balance gets first filled by a LF who hits otherwise, before a LHP is acquired.
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 06:52 AM EST (#337573) #
Normally, Carrera is a decision you take after spring training.
Carrera might agree to go to Buffalo and be the 5th outfielder when somebody else is on the DL.
He could declare free agency, but I don't think anybody would pick him up.

[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 06:57 AM EST (#337574) #
Carrera signed for 1162500$.

[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 08:26 AM EST (#337575) #
barney is good.

but guys like zeke I want at league minimum and able to be moved up and down to AAA at will.

bench is starting to get expensive.
[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 08:47 AM EST (#337576) #
Yeah, Barney might be worth it, and Zeke should be viewed as replacement level - especially since he's out of options.  Hopefully the team is willing to cut either player in spring training (for a sixth of their salary, if I'm remembering correctly) if they lose a competition with replacement level guys - Goins could give Barney a run for his money, although we don't seem to have brought in any AAA OF depth at all? 

with several guys having limited positional versatility and guaranteed contracts, I'd like more flexibility at the end of the bench. 

In awesome prospect news, Stoeten quotes Jim Callis on Vlad Jr. "He easily cracked my personal top 50 at No. 31 and I may rue placing him that low when I look back later this year," he says, adding that he'll "be a star wherever he plays."



[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 09:03 AM EST (#337577) #
As mentioned, Barney made $2.3M in 2014 and $2.5M in 2015, so the team likely factored that into his 2017 salary. I think $2.9M for him is perfectly reasonable. Very good utility infielder who can cover multiple positions.

Both Carrera and Goins are out of options, so decisions will have to be made on them in the spring. What the FO does to add to the OF and Travis' health will likely determine those two things.
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 09:23 AM EST (#337578) #
http://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/mlb/rookie-camp-gives-blue-jays-prospects-sniff-big-league-life/

The 'Aaron Sanchez off-season bulk' is becoming a thing now, apparently.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 09:27 AM EST (#337579) #
Yeah, I forgot he went through arbitration twice with the Dodgers. I only looked at his 2016 salary, which he got from the Jays as a non-tendered free agent, right?

Now that I think about it, $2.8M for Barney isn't bad at all. Plouffe just got $5M from Oakland, and while he's more valuable with the bat, I sure wouldn't want him playing 2B or SS for the Jays.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 09:44 AM EST (#337580) #
I don't think Goins and Barney are in the same league at all (figuratively, and hopefully literally speaking.)

Barney has been a better hitter and at least as good a defender for much longer, and if you compare their numbers at the same ages, Barney comes out on top every time, by a solid margin. While Goins showed some promise at getting on base in the second half of 2015, he dropped back to awfulness last year. Goins also has two seasons out of five where he's been less productive at the plate than the worst season of Barney's career, and despite the platoon advantage, Goins barely even hits lefties better than Barney (620 vs 613 OPS.) The gulf between an overall career 62 OPS+ and a career 75 OPS+ is pretty significant. Both are bad hitters, but Goins hasn't done anything over his career to show he should even be on a major league roster.

Goins is younger, and in theory there's room for him to improve, and he's definitely cheaper. But I don't think the upside and low salary is enough to make him a better choice than Barney. The team is probably still going to need both of them this year at some point, but I wouldn't want Goins taking away at-bats from Barney.
[ Reply to This ]
PeterG - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 10:40 AM EST (#337581) #
Shapiro on Fan590 now with Blair and Brunt. He says that Jays will be doing much more before spring training. Market is slow, wait it out. Jays less than halfway done for off season.
[ Reply to This ]
dalimon5 - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 11:11 AM EST (#337582) #
At the same time Brunt is now saying not to expect and headlines other than platoons in terms of player acquisitions.
[ Reply to This ]
lexomatic - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 11:16 AM EST (#337583) #
I thought theoretically Goins was better at SS, but not so much better to make up for the worse bat. I got the impression that Barney was better at 2b/3b, but I haven't checked the numbers.
[ Reply to This ]
Chuck - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 11:31 AM EST (#337584) #
Subjectively, Goins looks to be the better defender at both 2B and SS. In fact, he looks gold glove caliber at 2B.

Still, his career OPS is below 600 and that could be his undoing. If the Jays cut him loose he'll land somewhere quickly.

[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 11:34 AM EST (#337585) #
I think Goins makes more mistakes, which gets overlooked due to his spectacular range.
[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 11:56 AM EST (#337586) #
If you take an average of UZR and DRS for 2013-16, Goins and Barney are comparable (and excellent- in the vicinity of +15/150G) defensively at second base.  At shortstop, they both do not have enough innings for the numbers to mean very much but both are significantly above average.  On a club where both the starting shortstop and second baseman have significant durability issues, you would ideally have room for both on the roster- especially as Barney can also back-up left-field and both can back-up third base. Of course, the club is likely to jettison one so that Justin Smoak can remain.

Ezequiel Carrera is a decent 4th outfielder.  If he hit RHPs better than LHPs, then he would have value on this club.  He doesn't (and so he duplicates Upton).  Fun fact: in the last 3 seasons against LHP (113 PAs), Carrera has not popped up.  So far in his career, he's been truly a reverse platoon player and it does not seem to be a matter of luck even though the sample size is modest.

[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 12:29 PM EST (#337587) #
From the eye test, I find it hard not to agree with both uglyone and Chuck - Goins certainly seems to show more raw talent, but Barney sure scares me less when it comes to reliably making solid plays in general. As well, for what it's worth, Goins may look Gold Glove-calibre at 2B, but Barney has actually WON a GG at 2B.

Honestly, despite Goins' batting deficiencies, I'd sure rather have him on the roster than Smoak. If Smoak gets off to a bad start, and both Goins and Barney at least continue their career expectations, is it possible that Smoak gets sent to Buffalo? He could be stashed there pretty easily as it's hard to see anyone picking up his contract if he's NOT crushing the ball.

On the other hand, if he's not crushing the ball he really doesn't have any value to the Blue Jays any more than any other organization.

That contract still vexes me. I'm terribly vexed.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 12:32 PM EST (#337588) #
Loup $1.125
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 12:43 PM EST (#337589) #
Ugh, now that I think about it, after I compared Barney's contract to Plouffe's, Smoak looks even WORSE by comparison. The two are comparable hitters and Plouffe could give Donaldson a rest at 3B so the team doesn't have to rely on a guy like Andy Burns. The team is already heavy with RH batters, but still... ugh.
[ Reply to This ]
christaylor - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 12:48 PM EST (#337590) #
Just throwing this out there, because it seems like the Goins/Barney question is akin to "how many Angels can fit on the head of a pin", I've been mulling this what will be the questions/issues that will be top of mind in January 2018 for Jays fans?

1) Did Morales provide good value? Did Morales provide more value/$ than EE?

2) Did Pearce provide value? If he can provide position flexibility, stay healthy, and slash at his three year average of .267/.347/.493? Was he primarily an OF or IF?

3) Did Liriano put up a FIP, WHIP, and SO/W of 3.86/ 1.32 / 2.32 (in line with his past three seasons) as a back-end of the rotation SP or can he be a successful fireman out of the pen?

4) What sort of Melvin Upton showed up? Was he a serviceable LF who was more pre-trade 2016 than post-trade?

5) Did Travis stay healthy? If not, did it matter (might not if Pearce/Smoak provide positive value)?

6) Did Sanchez and/or Stroman take a step back/forward?

7) Assuming they land one of the flawed bats -- did it work out? Do they have the player for 2018 at a reasonable salary or a team option?

8) Did Pompey get a shot? If so, did he succeed?

9) Was 2017 a loss because of injuries? For example, Donaldson out for the season in May, Sanchez and one or more of the 2016 staff have arm troubles? Did the Jays respond by standing pat or did they start the rebuilding process at the deadline? Who was traded? Was it Tulo/Martin/Pillar?

10) If 9 happened, what is the time frame on the return? Do the prospects have a chance at being above average players or do they seem to be salary dumps?

I know it's a kind of fool's errand to think about all the possibilities of how 2017 will shape the 2018 offseason, but I think one or more of the above topics will see more than a few posts this time next year. Aside from 9/10 we may even be talking about the other issues even if the Jays meet/exceed expectations and win a 2017 WC.

Two more for good measure: 11) Did the Red Sox run away with the AL East? 12) How did the 2017 Jays compare to the 2017 Yankees? We could be talking about rebuilding in 2018 just because the Sox/Yankees look like excellent teams several years out.

Anyone have any other questions that they predict will be top of mind in 2018? (Other than how cheap the front office is and how we hate payroll parameters of course... which will live on for years to come, because of our corporate overlords.)
[ Reply to This ]
PeterG - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 12:54 PM EST (#337591) #
I think the reason the FO is higher on Smoak than most, is not only the defence at least in terms of catching the ball, but because of his high exit velo. The catch here, of course ,is for that to matter, he has to make more contact. Anyone can be fooled by a good curve, but if he could lay off the high fastball he would improve significantly as he is a reasonably good low ball hitter at least imo
[ Reply to This ]
dalimon5 - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 02:05 PM EST (#337592) #
Nice post Chris,

1) I think Morales will provide great value and outperform Encarnacion in 2017, though I think Edwin will have an amazing impact on the Indians roster.

2) No reason but I feel Pearce will be hit and miss, a lot of his damage came against Toronto the past few years. He seems redundant on a team with lots of RH batters who can crush lefty pitching. If Travis or Morales or an OF goes down and he steps up then he will have done enough.

3) I am expecting Liriano to be one of our top 2 SP's with Sanchez. His control was great with Martin and his fastball was hitting 96MPH in a few starts. I'm excited to see what he does. Estrada and Happ, I'm still surprised they both did aswell as they did last year and fully expect one of them and one of Stroman/Sanchez to have a down year due to performance or injury. Out of the 4, Stroman is the most vulnerable to the league adjusting to him quickest.

4) I think MLB players have the stuffiest lives right now in the history of the game. They get everything customized in their daily life and it can probably be a shock when they are thrown into a new city, new country and the like. I expect Upton to perform like pre 2016 trade...it really depends where Gibby slots him in the line up. In San Diego he wasn't batting 7/8/9 he was in the top 5 spots regularly.

5) See point #2

6) See point #3

7) Who knows what will work out, but I expect management not to tie down any resources past 2018. Most likely whoever they get if they sign a FA OF will be a let down, though I'd prefer the route they are going than signing someone like Fowler at the money he got which I think will bog a team down in the last 2 years of the contract.

8) The most intriguing question of all, for me at least. I'm all over Ugly One's admiration for Pompey. He's shown many times that Pompey has the same pedigree AT TIMES as some of the Red Sox young players, but something definitely isn't adding up with him. 2017 is the year he breaks out or busts either in Toronto or elsewhere.

9) Tulo has a NTC and spent a lot of money on a new home in Toronto this offseason (Steve Simmons Sun article has info on it from 3 weeks ago). I don't think he would waive his NTC unless it was for a championship run, and even then, who will give up good prospects for an age 30+ SS? I love Tulo, I think he will be a top 2 short stop again and improve on his numbers, but he ain't going anywhere for the next 4 years and I've got no problem with that. Donaldson I think is the guy to trade, and l see him getting traded after this season at the latest. It just makes sense. He's your best player, you're likely not going to retain him, and you need to be able to restock the farm to counteract the 2018 free agents that will have NYY, Boston, Philly, Washington and Dodgers all over them. Top Free Agents under 32 in 2018 off season:

Zach Britton
DJ Lemahieu
Manny Machado
AJ Pollock
Bryce Harper
Matt Harvey
Clayton Kershaw

10) The return would have to be star calibre prospects. Trading Travis, Pillar, Donaldson, Martin and Stroman for the best you can get. You would have our top 10 prospects which, the few who will be ready by 2018 will be AVG players at best in their first year. So as management you will need to get really good prospects back or go sign big free agents, and we all know the chances of a Machado or Harper coming to TO is slim to none. Tulo and Sanchez are the two Blue Jays I would keep. Donaldson I'm not as interested in as he ages because he's gonna decline while getting paid bank because he's got that stud reputation, and frankly, we can get the most in return for him by letting him walk. Of course, any market discount mutes the point...if he sees what's happening now with sluggers and wants to resign for less, but he's a solid offensive player, defense, leader, the whole package.

11) I don't anticipate the Red Sox doing as well as everybody else. I think one of Price or Sale will have an arm explode or the worst year of their career. Sale especially looked really suspect this year in the last third of the season (I watch a lot of his games because I'm a rare fan of Hawk's telecasts). Sale has been pitching to the Twins and Royals and Indians for his whole career and will see a whole other level of competition in the AL East. Sure, someone can dig up numbers and show me how well he pitched in the AL East, but compare that to his AL Central numbers and realize that the AL East is a grind and when guys like Machado, Donaldson, Tulo, Pedroia, etc get to face you15+ times instead of 3AB's in a season, you start to get hit. That's what I'm hoping for anyway because if he remains the regular Chris Sale then that team is gonna have an easy path to the playoffs with 3 pretty damn good SP's.

12) The Yankees will outperform the Red Sox led by a surprisingly better rotation 1-5. Then they will usher in their prospects for 2018 and then augment them with Bryce Harper and another significant free agent from 2018 off season.

And the CWS will complete the rebuild in half the time it took the Cubs, becoming the best team in the Central by end of season 2018. The hauls they got for those two players were ridiculous, and they still have Abreu, Quintana, Robertson and spare parts to sell off.

[ Reply to This ]
dalimon5 - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 02:10 PM EST (#337593) #
10) point should read that we will get the most by trading away Donaldson, not letting him walk which would net us very little if anything at all.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 02:34 PM EST (#337594) #
Jon Morosi @jonmorosi
1m
Shapiro also told @SNJeffBlair Jays have pursued free agents who would add the most WAR per dollar, as opposed to targeting specific needs.



That's what I was getting at yesterday.
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 02:44 PM EST (#337595) #
"At the same time Brunt is now saying not to expect and headlines other than platoons in terms of player acquisitions."


Other than Bautista, there's really not much out there aside from platoon options or buy low options with questionable bats. Even in trades the Jays seem unlikely to trade any (good) prospects so not expecting much traction there unless it's a salary dump (ex. Jay Bruce).

The only bright side, assuming Colby's deal set the market on mid/low tier OF's, is that it shouldn't be too expensive to acquire two or three bats if Bautista is out of the running. So the prices and term on guys like Moss, Pagan, Valbuena, etc, should presumably be fairly reasonable.
[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 05:52 PM EST (#337596) #
Vladimir Guerrero will start the trade talk on anyone. That gets a person's attention, everyone will listen. How far trades could go will vary. This is the only prospect the Jays have with that cachet. Aaron Sanchez has it, Josh Donaldson has it, but no one else on the Jays do. Aaron Sanchez will not be traded. Josh Donaldson will not be traded. Vladimir Guerrero starts the conversation.

I think it's a mistake not to trade for one needed piece. Best result says anyone is at least two years away. No help should be expected before that time. This is the mother of all windows; this is the stage where the Jays perform for that mega-offseason shouting we are a home for you too.
[ Reply to This ]
Gerry - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 06:00 PM EST (#337597) #
Chris Ianetta to the DBacks. Cross another one off the list.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 06:06 PM EST (#337598) #
I disagree that Vladimir Guerrero should be traded.
[ Reply to This ]
dalimon5 - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 06:29 PM EST (#337599) #
Richard,

Can you tell me what the lottery numbers will be tomorrow? I need to buy a ticket and need to know definitively what will happen before it happens.
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 06:46 PM EST (#337600) #
The most WAR per dollar? That would at least rule out Bruce.
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 06:53 PM EST (#337601) #
That gives the DBacks 3 backup catchers.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 07:09 PM EST (#337602) #
WAR/$ is what every organization chases. Not every organization has the same budget or the same existing contracts on the books, though.

An argument can obviously made that the Jays should have a larger budget, but none of us knows exactly what that budget is.

When a regime has to deal with existing contract obligations (and not just this year's) they might not have the same financial flexibility to spend that fans wish they did.
[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 07:27 PM EST (#337603) #
I disagree that Vladimir Guerrero should be traded.

Wow! People read what they want to read from an article. They interpret everything accordingly. Vladimir starts the conversation. No more no less. Whether it's Manny Machado, Clayton Kershaw, Freddie Freeman or anyone else, doesn't matter; Guerrero starts the conversation - how far it goes?

Vladimir Guerrero gets traded only if it's exactly the right thing to do and only then. It's not our choice. He starts the conversations.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 07:55 PM EST (#337604) #
Um. What?
[ Reply to This ]
PeterG - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 08:21 PM EST (#337605) #
I highly doubt Vlad's name is broached by the Jays. Anyone who thinks that, does not understand what the FO is about.
[ Reply to This ]
dalimon5 - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 08:39 PM EST (#337606) #
Vlad Jr is way to young and unproven to be a conversation-starter or untradeable. Anyone trading for him will be trading for potential. Guess what, if he doesn't deliver in A or AA ball he becomes a bust. Seager, Urias, Moncada, Turner, Espinosa, Sanchez... those are conversation starters for real deals. Vlad is the best prospect Jays can dangle because of bloodlines and potential. No one knows if he will fall off or be the next big thing. But please, let's stop pretending he's a legit trade piece because he's way behind what other teams have and is still way too young. No one's gonna trade a big piece to us for him alone. Now if he destroys A pitching or above that's another story.

So I agree, management likely has no interest in trading a prospect like him until he hits his highest value. We will be likely if he turns out to be like Sano.
[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Friday, January 13 2017 @ 09:11 PM EST (#337607) #
Nah, Vlad Jr. is a legit top prospect.  Teams are more and more willing to trade for younger prospects.  Espinoza was the main return for Pomeranz, a kid roughly one year older than Vlad Jr.  He was ranked in the top-20 at the time of the deal.  I just posted a Jim Callis quote placing Vlad in the 30s and suggesting he'll move up from that ranking quickly. 

Now, Espinoza yielded Drew Pomeranz, so clearly, Vlad Jr. straight up would be for someone less valuable than Drew Pomeranz.  But that's still plenty valuable. 

I could easily see an aggressive GM starting conversations with Vlad's name.  Not that I think we should trade him. 

[ Reply to This ]
Glevin - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 03:53 AM EST (#337608) #
"Now, Espinoza yielded Drew Pomeranz, so clearly, Vlad Jr. straight up would be for someone less valuable than Drew Pomeranz. But that's still plenty valuable"

I don't think you can look at things like this as there are way too many other factors.
1) Top prospects usually get you more than someone like Pomeranz. Dombrowski throws his prospects around easily.
2) the further from the majors you are, the less value you have as a prospect. Vlad will be expected to be in the majors when, 2020? He is a fantastic prospect but only teams doing serious rebuilds or with tons of depth already would give fair value. Most teams look at shorter windows.
3) hitters are more protectable than pitchers and less of a crapshoot.

I'd be fine trading Vlad only if we got a young controllable asset back. Even then, I'd probably rather not because I fully expect Vlad's value to grow every year and in the jays' long term plans , it doesn't make much sense to trade him.
[ Reply to This ]
BlueJayWay - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 09:10 AM EST (#337609) #
Vlad is so young he's basically a pre-prospect at this point.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 10:36 AM EST (#337610) #
Franklin Barreto is another years-away prospect who netted a pretty good haul for the Jays.

I still think the Jays should keep Guerrero, though.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 01:08 PM EST (#337611) #
trading top prospects when we could have just spent money this offseason would be a crying shame.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 01:16 PM EST (#337612) #
""WAR/$ is what every organization chases."

it's always a factor, but not always the priority. some orgs will be willing to make less than optimal value moves in order to just make the team better.

for our FO i think that is very very hard for them to ever make a move where the value isn't optimized. And be sure they have a very clear dollar value attached to every prospect, draft pick, and player. Their philosophy imo is the cherington one in boston - just keep making a constant stream of value moves, never make a non-value move, and the team should always be solid and flexible, with no worries about windows or rebuilds, and may in any given year coalesce into a champion with some luck.

it may work.
[ Reply to This ]
Chuck - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 02:00 PM EST (#337613) #
WAR/$ is what every organization chases

As a loose, philosophical strategy, sure. this is true. Teams want top value for the dollar. But as a literal statement, I don't entirely accept it.

I have argued many times that I don't believe WAR to be linear. That is to say, each incremental WAR a given player can provide is worth more than the WAR before it. So even if FanGraphs places the values of 1 WAR at $8M (or whatever), no organization is chasing down 1-WAR players at that rate, or anything close. They know that 1-WAR players can be had for peanuts. Those aren't the players that are the difference-makers, unless you are plugging some serious holes.

My position is that for a given player, WAR #2 is worth more than WAR #1, WAR #3 more than WAR #2 etc. You find a 5-WAR player and I would argue that his valuation should be measured in increasingly valuable single WARs that make up his 5. I'm not entirely sure what the numbers should be for each successive WAR, but I believe in this type of model where valuation is concerned.

A team that strictly looks to optimize WAR/$ would look to win 72 games on a $50M payroll.

[ Reply to This ]
vw_fan17 - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 02:11 PM EST (#337614) #

A team that strictly looks to optimize WAR/$ would look to win 72 games on a $50M payroll.


Agreed. As a business, that's probably great ROI. As a baseball fan, I'd rather take the Dodgers' or Yankees-of-old irrational, non-WAR-maximing spending any day over "$125 optimally spent and $40M saved" after back-to-back ALCS appearances.. In a total rebuild year, that makes sense.

On the other hand, I have to admit, I'm glad this team isn't run like the Leafs of old, where EVERY free agent HAD to be signed/re-signed, and management ALWAYS blinked. Contracts like Clarkson, resigning Lupul, for more $$ than prudent, trades where it seemed an extra pick or two were always thrown in, because the other side knew the fans were rabid and management WOULD cave.. The Leafs management of old would have given Bautista his $150M..


[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 03:09 PM EST (#337615) #
Their philosophy imo is the cherington one in boston...

Ben Cherington's two "top" free agent signings were Hanley Ramirez and Pablo Sandoval.
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 03:17 PM EST (#337616) #
The issue is not WAR vs the payroll.

They already have a team and I don't think they care about trading a 2-WAR guy for 3 1-WAR guys.

The issue is that there's roughly 25M left to spend. Bautista is the best outfielder left but they are not going to give it all to him.
If Bautista was willing to sign at a price that leaves enough to get a reliever and a backup catcher, he would probably be already inked.
Also, it's pretty hard to give a WAR values to the guys that are left.

[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 03:21 PM EST (#337617) #
My position is that for a given player, WAR #2 is worth more than WAR #1, WAR #3 more than WAR #2 etc. You find a 5-WAR player and I would argue that his valuation should be measured in increasingly valuable single WARs that make up his 5. I'm not entirely sure what the numbers should be for each successive WAR, but I believe in this type of model where valuation is concerned.

That is entirely true. Spending $507k per player for one hundred 0.5 WAR players is not going to get you anywhere, because you have to include the value of an ML roster spot in your equation. I don't think anyone would argue that WAR is a linear value scale - in fact, I've argued very specifically AGAINST that idea on several occasions.

The point I've been trying to make is that when you sign a 34 year-old free agent for $80M because he produced 3.5 WAR in his walk year, you're committing a ton of your financial flexibility to one single roster spot, and when each of that player's historical comparisons have failed to produce 3.5 WAR in TOTAL over the course of that projected contract, you're spending $20M a year for a single roster spot that is unlikely to even provide an median 1.5 WAR per year.

A team that strictly looks to optimize WAR/$ would look to win 72 games on a $50M payroll.

A team that is comprised exclusively of free agents signed by WAR/$ would indeed be lucky to win 72 games a year.

A team that drafts well and develops players successfully doesn't ever need to worry about being in that position.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 03:28 PM EST (#337618) #
I'm glad this team isn't run like the Leafs of old, where EVERY free agent HAD to be signed/re-signed...

The problem with the Leafs isn't retention of every free agent, it's that they can't figure out the difference between good players and bad ones. They jettisoned broken-down veterans Doug Gilmour and Dave Andreychuk, both of who went on to play solid hockey for another 10-15 seasons.

...and both of whom are Hall-of-Famers.

That goes a few years back, but the team they broke up when they traded those guys are the last team that actually had any success. Since then, they've somehow managed to put together a MORE incompetent talent evaluation department.
[ Reply to This ]
PeterG - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 03:45 PM EST (#337619) #
What do all think about the possibility of switch hitting OF Angel Pagan?
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 03:46 PM EST (#337620) #
believe it or not, panda and hanley were actually value plays for their payroll size, while refusing to hand out Lester deals.
[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 03:54 PM EST (#337621) #
When you wait for things to happen you tend to cede control. As a fan, you never have control.

As best as I can tell, Michael Saunders, Brandon Moss and Angel Pagan are the Jays prime Free Agent targets with Curtis Granderson and Jay Bruce as Trade targets and probably that order of importance. I mean one of these guys will play RF in Toronto - right? I like Saunders and strangely enough Jay Bruce.

Kurt Suzuki, Dioner Navarro and Hank Conger appear to be the Jays' primary Catching Options now that favorite Chris Iannetta has signed elsewhere. I prefer Kurt Suzuki much more than the others - but then, what do I know?

I don't know who's this year's Marco Estrada, but there's still five weeks to decide that and too many average Starters available to choose from. However Bullpen Left-handed options are thin, unless one of the Left-handed Starters can make the switch. Travis Wood wants to be a Starter, but if someone wanted him, he would have signed by now. He joins Jerry Blevins, Boone Logan and J.P. Howell as the Jays' Left-handed options.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 04:32 PM EST (#337622) #
believe it or not, panda and hanley were actually value plays for their payroll size, while refusing to hand out Lester deals.

First of all, no. I don't believe it. Not at all. You're now trying to defend the concept of spending less money on free agency? So far, the two contracts have provided a total of 0.4 WAR at a cost of $77.7M. Those are not value moves for any organization. You're free to make the argument that they're both going to get better as they get older, the same way you're free to argue that Encarnacion is more valuable than Ramirez and Sandoval COMBINED, despite being three years older when hitting free agency and providing zero defensive value. Best of luck with that.

Cherington didn't hand out Lester deals. No, he handed out Sandoval and H. Ramirez deals. You want to defend those moves as "value" deals? You're simply wrong. You're just flat-out wrong. You hate the Morales signing but you love the Sandoval and Ramirez signings. The move you specifically mentioned that Cherington DIDN'T make (Lester) is the only one that has actually provided any value for the team he signed with.

Why are you trying to defend this flawed argument? Especially after you've spent a solid TWO YEARS lamenting the Jays' decision to let David Price walk? It's almost as if you change your viewpoint as often as it takes to attempt to defend the argument you are making at that moment.
[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 04:42 PM EST (#337623) #
The Josh Donaldson trade and Russell Martin signing occurred around the same time as, but a little before the Pablo Sandoval and Hanley Ramirez signings. The Blue Jays' insignificant efforts to keep up with Boston were crushed by all the press, while Boston was picked to win it all. We all know what happens next. Toronto: 2 - Boston: 0. Only when Boston does better than Toronto will that change.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 04:46 PM EST (#337624) #
Yes, Panda and Hanley for their age and projected value were in fact value deals free agent deals in term and price, in contrast to the contract they refused to match for Lester.

Of course, they were still dumb deals.
[ Reply to This ]
dan gordon - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 04:54 PM EST (#337625) #
"They jettisoned broken-down veterans Doug Gilmour and Dave Andreychuk, both of who went on to play solid hockey for another 10-15 seasons"

Well, they traded Gilmour with 20 games left in the 1996-97 season. He had 3 more reasonably good seasons after that, and then was a fringe player for another 3 seasons, never getting more than 41 points. Toronto getting Gilmour in a trade from Calgary during the 1991-92 season was actually one of the better trades in NHL history. Andreychuk was traded with 15 games left in the 1995-96 season. He had a good season the next year, and then after that he never had a 20 goal, 40 point season again, although he did score 20 a few times. When Toronto got him from Buffalo, it was another big get for the Leafs, and, like Gilmour, he had his best seasons as a Leaf.

"the team they broke up when they traded those guys are the last team that actually had any success"

Uh, again, this is inaccurate. The Gilmour/Andreychuk team made it to the Stanley Cup semi-finals twice, in 1993 and 1994, but the Sundin-captained Leafs team also made it to the semi-finals twice, in 1999 and 2002. In fact, from 1993 to 2002, the Leafs made it to the "final four" of the playoffs more often than any other NHL team. The strike happened a couple of years later, the salary cap started, and the Leafs have done a very poor job of managing their player personnel since then. The new regime has done a very good job of acquiring/drafting some exciting young talent, the team is finally showing some real promise again, and are once again a team that is fun to watch.

You can put me in the camp of not wanting to trade Guerrero. McCown was talking about trading him for McCutcheon a couple of times this week, and he seemed all in favour of it. I believe it was Damien Cox who added that they wouldn't be able to get McCutcheon even up, so they would have to add a pitching prospect like Reid-Foley. Ugh. To me, it seems that most fans fit into one of two camps, the "trade prospects for players" camp, and the "hang on to your prospects" camp, and these views can be very fervently held. Kind of like Republicans/Democrats, Liberals/Conservatives. It really is quite interesting from a psychological standpoint.
[ Reply to This ]
ISLAND BOY - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 05:09 PM EST (#337626) #
A bad Leaf trait in the past was trading high draft picks for middling players. The worst was trading their first round pick one year to New Jersey for a solid but still unremarkable defenseman named Tom Kurvers. New Jersey then used that pick the next year, which turned out to be third overall, to select future Hall-of-Famer, Scott Niedermeyer. I've often wondered why baseball is the only major sport to not allow the trading of draft picks, but the way this turns out sometimes, maybe it's to protect teams from themselves.
[ Reply to This ]
dan gordon - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 05:38 PM EST (#337627) #
Yah, that Kurvers trade was horrible - I remember another GM quoted as saying "why didn't they at least shop the pick around the league, we would have given up a lot more than Kurvers for the pick". Another bad habit they had was trading guys they had taken as high draft picks, then trading them when they weren't great right away, like Randy Carlyle, who developed into one of the best NHL defensemen after they dumped him for a fading Dave Burrows. Another horrible deal was trading Errol Thompson and 2(!) 1st round picks to Detroit for Dan Maloney. The Wings GM was quoted as saying afterwards that he would have taken Thompson even up for Maloney, and, as it turned out, they both had 4 seasons left of rough equivalency. Unfortunately for Detroit, they pretty much whiffed on the 2 1st round picks. This kind of largesse with picks and young players has made me very leery of giving up young players for guys who are getting toward the latter stages of their careers. I hate seeing guys like Syndergaard become big stars with other teams. My other favourite baseball team, the Giants, had a long history of trading away good young players back in the 60's, 70's, 80's. The name George Foster still irks me.
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 05:50 PM EST (#337628) #
Angel Pagan?

Good contact hitter (strikes out less than averages), but walks a bit less than average.
Pretty average defense in a corner spot.
Power? Well, he hits the ball hard, but more often than not, he hits it on the ground.
When he hits it in the air, it's often a line drive. Could benefit from a hitter friendly ballpark. Or not.
His health hasn't been great. It's more or less the same as Bautista. He's roughly the same age.
Whereas Bautista would still be a full time player, Pagan would make a good platoon partner for Upton.

There's potential for 2+ WAR, but there's a risk.
Steamer says 0.3 WAR

[ Reply to This ]
dan gordon - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 06:53 PM EST (#337629) #
As a Giants fan, I'm pretty familiar with Pagan. He is very injury prone, a problem that likely only gets worse with age. He'll be 36 in July, and is getting very near the end of the line. He used to be a very good defensive outfielder, but those days are well behind him. The Giants kept playing him in CF until last year, despite the fact that he was no longer able to handle the position effectively. Even in LF last year, he put up a significant negative dWAR. He's obviously lost a lot of his former speed, although he remains a high percentage base stealer by picking his spots carefully, and not running nearly as often. Batting left handed, he hits for a much better average and walks more than when he hits right handed, but hitting righty, he hits a lot more home runs. Despite the extra home runs batting righty, his career SLG is actually better left handed due to the higher BA and a tremendous preponderance of triples while hitting left handed, 50, compared to 5 hitting right handed. I think he could be a useful addition as long as he wasn't expected to be available for 160 games. You could do worse then Pagan as a platoon partner for Upton, who could also be a defensive replacement in late innings. You'd need to acquire a big bat for RF though, and I'd want the flexibility to bring Pompey up to take over LF in case he puts it together in AAA for a couple of months. I wouldn't want Pagan on any more than a 1 year contract. I imagine Upton could be dealt, or just released for that matter, given that SD is paying most of the freight for that contract.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 07:07 PM EST (#337630) #
Upton is streaky, but Carrera has never been any good. If the team has to choose between one or the other, I really hope it doesn't come down to asking Gibbons who he likes better.
[ Reply to This ]
dan gordon - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 07:38 PM EST (#337631) #
I see Russell Martin is switching to shortstop. That's right, he's going to play SS for Team Canada in the World Baseball Classic. Should be worth the price of admission.
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Saturday, January 14 2017 @ 08:03 PM EST (#337632) #
I wouldn't expect Bautista to play 160 games either.
There's supposed to be more off days, but I believe that starts next year.
[ Reply to This ]
cybercavalier - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 12:29 AM EST (#337633) #
Chris Ianetta to the DBacks. Cross another one off the list.

Cross off Cabrera, Ramon age27 to the Marlins.
Cross off Gimenez, Chris age34 to the Twins
Cross off Castillo, Wilkin age31 to the Yankees.
[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 01:03 AM EST (#337634) #
Russell Martin always had a bigger ego than he had common sense. If that's his plan, the Jays better lay the law down. He catches or he's forbidden to play.
[ Reply to This ]
Michael - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 01:32 AM EST (#337635) #
It might be better for his health to play ss than c. No squatting or foul tips.
[ Reply to This ]
cybercavalier - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 01:43 AM EST (#337636) #
Kurt Suzuki, Dioner Navarro and Hank Conger appear to be the Jays' primary Catching Options now that favorite Chris Iannetta has signed elsewhere. I prefer Kurt Suzuki much more than the others - but then, what do I know?

Shall we cross off Steve Clavenger off the shopping list too, given Yunel Escobar's controversy during his tenure in Toronto.

[ Reply to This ]
Michael - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 02:42 AM EST (#337637) #
Latest rumor is Cleveland interested in Jose: http://fansided.com/2017/01/14/mlb-rumors-cleveland-indians-emerge-candidate-sign-jose-bautista/
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 09:40 AM EST (#337638) #
Cleveland is pretty close to the limit of their payroll.
They could do a back loaded 2 year deals but that's a far cry of Bautista take a one year deal to re-establish his value.
Also, Cleveland has lots of outfielders they would need to send back to AAA.

[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 10:22 AM EST (#337639) #
1) Top prospects usually get you more than someone like Pomeranz. Dombrowski throws his prospects around easily.
2) the further from the majors you are, the less value you have as a prospect. Vlad will be expected to be in the majors when, 2020? He is a fantastic prospect but only teams doing serious rebuilds or with tons of depth already would give fair value. Most teams look at shorter windows.
3) hitters are more protectable than pitchers and less of a crapshoot.

Glevin, there's been a lot of talk around here about our minor league system being unbalanced - our depth is lower level.  Other teams are in the reverse position and are happy to add long-term assets, or are trying to have a good mix of positional prospects and pitchers.  A team might specifically want a vlad jr. type as a replacement for an existing young 3b man.  the further from the bigs, the more variability in the prospect - which I think explains why Espinoza yielded Pomeranz rather than being the key prospect in a package for a better player. 

I don't think anyone here is advocating trading for him, but I do think Jim Callis is right in asking if Vlad Jr. might continue to claim rapidly in prospect rankings.


[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 10:34 AM EST (#337640) #
Anyone see this quote from Shapiro?

"The reality of our system is that that’s going to take time -- we’re just not there right now. We have a guy here, a guy there now, but we need to field teams in New Hampshire and in Buffalo that are full of players that have a chance to be championship calibre players.”

I find this a bit disingenuous ... our AA team should have some pretty good prospects with guys like Greene, Gurriel, Tellez, McGuire and Ramirez likely starting the year there and others like SRF and Urena likely to arrive this season.  many top prospects skip AAA and lots of teams are more likely to fill out AAA with AAAA types or useful bench players with options.  IMO, this sounds like he is advancing a narrative and justifying a cautious offseason.  We have a solid, improving farm and a chance to win now - and resigning Jose only costs money. 

And I don't even think we've done enough to restock the minor league depth in Buffalo with minor league FA's / waiver claims / etc. either. 
[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 11:02 AM EST (#337641) #
Here's a Boras quote on Shapiro from 2006. 

I imagine that the Blue Jays are going to run out Sanchez for 230-240 innings in 2017, and see how he fares. Negotiations on an extension will probably begin then. Hopefully extension negotiations are going on right now with Donaldson and Stroman. 
[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 11:46 AM EST (#337642) #
Shapiro has been lauded for some of his long-term extensions for core players - if we are going to be cautious in signing FAs, these types of deals would certainly fit the plan, help appease a restless fanbase and hopefully make long-term sense.  Just got to get the right guys - Stro and Sanchez for sure, but I don't see it with Donaldson - IMO our chance there came and went when we signed him for two years with his last contract. 
[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 12:04 PM EST (#337643) #
You could certainly get creative with Donaldson.  He's a 30 year old player with an established WAR level of 7 (4 years running).  There is nothing to suggest that his aging curve will be worse than average.  He's signed for a team-friendly contract in 2017 and is going to break arb records in 2018.  If you are going to extend him, you could increase his rate of pay for 2017 (there is room on the payroll for that) and then pay him at a little below market rates for following years (roughly $30 million per year).  I'd rather have Donaldson through age 36 or 37 than Price through age 36 (because he's a better player...)
[ Reply to This ]
Glevin - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 12:28 PM EST (#337644) #
"I find this a bit disingenuous ... our AA team should have some pretty good prospects with guys like Greene, Gurriel, Tellez, McGuire and Ramirez likely starting the year there and others like SRF and Urena likely to arrive this season. many top prospects skip AAA and lots of teams are more likely to fill out AAA with AAAA types or useful bench players with options. IMO, this sounds like he is advancing a narrative and justifying a cautious offseason. We have a solid, improving farm and a chance to win now - and resigning Jose only costs money. "

It's not disingenuous in the least. What is disingenuous is this ludicrous attacking of the front office for doing exactly what they should be doing. Teams need to do what Shapiro says. The Jays got nothing from their rookies last year and are likely to get nothing or close to that this year. The Jays have no pitching depth at all because we traded away all of our pitchers in the upper minors. The Jays did not have the prospect depth to trade to make a run for it. It's not about having good prospects, it's about having a system that pumps out major league talent every year. That means building from the bottom up. It is very difficult to win unless you have a top to bottom strong system. If you can't see the holes that the Jays have because the top of the system has been emptied out, you're not looking very hard.

Also, the skipping AAA thing is nonsense. of the top-10 WAR hitters in baseball last year, none started the year in AA. None skipped straight from AA. Only Aledmys Diaz didn't spend a lot of time in AAA. All prospects almost always spend time in AAA. Even top prospects like Trout, Harper, Correa, Bryant, Betts, etc...all played in AAA. Also, how easy do you think it is to fill out AAA with "useful bench players"? Barney is a useful bench player and he costs almost $3M a year.
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 12:50 PM EST (#337645) #
Agreed with GLevin. This will be the 2nd straight year where the team does not have a SP prospect in AAA, and their only position player prospect that figures to start in Buffalo is Tellez. The system is getting better, certainly from a depth standpoint, but the upper minors is still not where it should be. I saw nothing wrong with Shapiro's comment either. The system needs more star calibre types (Guerrero is one). It will take some time. With prospects there is a ton of unpredictability, so players who look good might become busts and players who look average may take off, but ultimately, in order to create a pipeline of talent to fill MLB holes or to make trades for Chris Sale types, the Jays will need to improve the system. I don't think that's off base at all.
[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 12:56 PM EST (#337646) #
It used to be common for top prospects to skip triple A.  It no longer is.  Teams will usually start top prospects in triple A to begin the season and bring them up at the end of April (for service time/years of control reasons- see Longoria E, Trout M, Harper B) or at some point in June or early July (for service time/super 2 reasons- see Lindor F). 

The Blue Jays are (I am pretty sure) going to start Tellez in Buffalo.  They have said that they are going to start Gurriel in double A (at shortstop).  As he did not play in 2016, his time frame is subject to more than usual variability.  As for the others, I have no idea where they will be placed. 

[ Reply to This ]
lexomatic - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 01:10 PM EST (#337647) #
They have said that they are going to start Gurriel in double A (at shortstop).  As he did not play in 2016, his time frame is subject to more than usual variability.  As for the others, I have no idea where they will be placed.

This is a curious decision.  Is Urena being moved to 2B , or bumped to AAA? He hardly has any experience and wasn't good after a really quick start - not really deserving of a promotion. I thought I remember reading that he was a good defensive shortstop as well, which seems weird to bump him for an unknown who hasn't played in a year. If Gurriel is starting at SS to ease the transition, but will playing a few positions I wouldn't be as concerned, though I still think it's mishandling Urena.
For an organization that prioritizes prospects, this appears to be weird handling of one.

[ Reply to This ]
lexomatic - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 01:21 PM EST (#337648) #
Anyone see this quote from Shapiro?

"The reality of our system is that that’s going to take time -- we’re just not there right now. We have a guy here, a guy there now, but we need to field teams in New Hampshire and in Buffalo that are full of players that have a chance to be championship calibre players.”

I had the same reaction as jerjapan - My problem is with the words "championship calibre." It's a meaninngless statement. What is a championship calibre player? Is it a regular who's a potential all-star? Teams have won with terrible players. Those players are championship calibre because they participated. (For example, Borders was below replacement in 93, Griffin, Jackson, and Coles combined for -2 WAR in 500 PA the same year. 
If you look at potential ML regulars or all-stars, I don't think ANY team in MLB has AA and AAA teams full of "championship calibre players."

Anyway, if someone has the full quote and that is defined, please post it.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 01:34 PM EST (#337649) #
Sometimes championship-calibre players win championships. Sometimes they don't. A replacement-level player can be a black hole with the bat for the whole year (Borders) and then win a World Series MVP award because he got hot at the right time.

Encarnacion is great in the regular season, and he had a great 2015 ALDS, but he was awful in the ALCS. He was great in the 2016 ALDS, but awful in the ALCS.

Bautista was great all through the 2015 playoffs, but he disgraced himself in the 2016 playoffs.

Are neither of these guys championship-calibre players?

The term is pretty subjective. Can you call Pat Borders a championship-calibre player but not Edwin Encarnacion?

A championship-calibre TEAM is a more meaningful label, in my opinion.
[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 01:35 PM EST (#337650) #
Man, I accidentally deleted my reply, so some of the numbers are missing, but off the top of my head,

9 out of ten WAR leaders from last year averaged under 30 games a piece in AAA, with Altuve and Machado skipping AAA entirely.  Tons of other young players spent minimal time in AAA - guys like Bregman, Correa and Springer in Houston, and our own young pitching trio of Stroman, Sanchez and Osuna - 13 AAA starts total.  The only real outlier was our own late blooming MVP candidate, Josh Donaldson. 

I think it's plenty easy to build a AAA roster of minor league depth - guys like Barney and Carrera before arbitration / running out of options.  Take a look at the Bisons roster (admittedly, highly incomplete).  The only key returning position players are Pompey, Cecilliani and Goins if he clears waivers - which I doubt.  They pitching staff features additions like Jarret Grube, Patrick Walby and Kender Villegas although some of the relief options - Beliveau and Leone in particular - could help.  

We've had recent valuable contributions in the bigs from the low-cost likes of Carerra and Smoak (when they were cheap), Cola, Schultz, Danny Valencia and Liam Hendricks recently.  The new FO has yet to provide any upside from this route - with the notable exception of Biagini. 

Mike, I'd love to see them get creative and resign Donaldson - I just don't see them as the creative types to break from the received wisdom of 'don't extend older players' longterm.  If you are going to, Donaldson is a good one to bet on.

[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 02:08 PM EST (#337651) #
Anyway, if someone has the full quote and that is defined, please post it.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/590/jeff-blair-show/mark-shapiro-dont-judge-off-season-yet/
[ Reply to This ]
lexomatic - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 02:48 PM EST (#337652) #
Anyway, if someone has the full quote and that is defined, please post it.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/590/jeff-blair-show/mark-shapiro-dont-judge-off-season-yet/

Thanks for posting this.
After listening to the interview, I'm more convinced of my position. While there is no  real definition of championship calibre player, he does talk about competitive team, and having young players who can contribute. I think this is disingenuous, again, because no teams have young prospects that fill AA, and AAA. rosters Further, players will not develop at lower levels being put into more minor roles. Agents might even steer clients clear of the Jays for potential lack of opportunity. I'm all for competition, and making people earn promotions and starting roles, but I don't think this is a realistic scenario.

So far Shapiro's apparent team-building philosophy is much removed from what I would consider ideal, and it's going to take some time to win me over. I'm going to be suspicious of moves and non-moves, because he's a good speaker.

He talked about Bautista being the best bat available, and not going for the younger, better defense, lefty bat just for the sake of it if there are better players available. It leaves me with 2 scenarios - Bautista hasn't shifted his expectations to the reality of this offseason, or Shapiro & co are saying things without intention of signing him.

Thinking about the Jays really is leaving a bad taste in my mouth at the moment.
[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 03:48 PM EST (#337653) #
Totally agree with your last post Lexomatic.

Mike Green is right about service time being a major consideration for top prospects getting AAA time simply to manage their contract status.

As for Gurriel, I think the org is trying to get some versatility out of him - if we can get a Ben Zobrist-light type utility player out of him, I'd be more than happy.  SS is also to see if he could play there everyday if his bat develops enough to be a regular.  His deal is my favourite of the offseason by a longshot. 

My guess is that the team gets to look at Urena at several other positions and Guriel gets promoted relatively quickly to AAA anyway - midseason most likely, if he can shake off the rust of not playing this past season. 


[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 04:33 PM EST (#337654) #
They moved their AA coach to AAA to continue the player development there. I believe it's real.

[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 05:37 PM EST (#337655) #
Everything this Team has done for at least the last ten years has been a year or two early. Sometimes they are right, but more often they're not. Rowdy Tellez will spend his entire career working hard on his defense, this despite his offensive abilities. His defense will keep him in the game, but his offense will get him there. He is the only person we could possibly expect to be on the Jays at any time in 2017.

Justin Smoak fell off the table last year, he just disappeared. We never found out why. That makes me think it was personal stuff. He's a very good defender at 1B with limited range. He's a switch hitter who can only hit left-handed verses RHP. Steve Pearce can't stay healthy. He hits LHP extremely well and now is at least average-ish verses RHP so he can play/take ABs from Smoak more than we think. He's supposed to be very good defensively at 1B and LF. Kendrys Morales wasn't need as a 1B his last two years in K.C. He is supposed to be Edwin-ish defensively (TSN 1050 Today, January 11, 2017, Hour 1 podcast). He's supposed to have a good average, good OBP, good SLG from either side of the plate.

In other words, this is Rowdy's job if he can take and hold it, as soon as he can take it and hold it.
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 06:08 PM EST (#337656) #
Price said he will remain in Boston throughout the life of the contract.
[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 07:48 PM EST (#337657) #
Devon Travis and Troy Tulowitzki cover the middle for the Jays. They are very good or better defensively and that doesn't look to change any time soon. They hit very well with good OBP and SLG and I expect that not to change. Both have experienced non-normal health issues that have cost them time. Ryan Goins and Darwin Barney are the primary backups, but both are without options. While Goins might be a wee bit better defensively, Darwin is much better offensively. Lourdes Gurriel JR was signed to a Major League contract so he's considered a priority for them. He just needs to play organized Baseball for a year or two to be ready. Up the middle and first base are covered as best as they can. I can understand better when Shapiro says they are less than half done.
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 08:03 PM EST (#337658) #
I don't know why some were so sure that Price would opt out to begin with. A lot can change from now to 2018, but if he did opt out, he would be opting out of a guaranteed $127M over four years in his age 33 season. I know inflation and the market can change things, but is any team going to give Price a raise over what Boston already owes him (in years, dollars, or both) for his age 33-37 seasons? That seems like a long shot to me.

I guess we will see how he performs over the next two years and how the pitching market shapes up.
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 09:27 PM EST (#337659) #
He signed a couple of  guys. I'd like to add at least 3 more.
Less than half done.

[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 09:28 PM EST (#337660) #
I don't know why some were so sure that Price would opt out to begin with. A lot can change from now to 2018, but if he did opt out, he would be opting out of a guaranteed $127M over four years in his age 33 season. I know inflation and the market can change things, but is any team going to give Price a raise over what Boston already owes him (in years, dollars, or both) for his age 33-37 seasons? That seems like a long shot to me.

I guess we will see how he performs over the next two years and how the pitching market shapes up.

SK, you are a bright individual and I read everything you say with interest.  However, I'd invite some analysis from you on this point, rather than this consistent conjecture.

I've linked to many articles discussing the value of the opt-out clause for both the player and the org.  Your posts make me wonder if your thinking is a bit outdated. 

Please show me that I'm wrong.  I am very much learning from a statistical and rhetorical perspective, so i invite any sound argument. 
[ Reply to This ]
jerjapan - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 09:34 PM EST (#337661) #
Price said he will remain in Boston throughout the life of the contract.

Scottt, are you being sarcastic?  I don't get your point here. Many people say many things about contracts and negotiation - obviously, the expectation from those of us receiving the comments is that they might not be entirely true beyond the specific moment they were said, truth is subjective, yada yada.

Price will opt out of the contract if it benefits him, and stay in the contract if that is beneficial.  no one is being dishonest about anything, except a bunch of posters who think their intuitive understanding of markets beats the real markets.  (sorry, I'm not talking about you here Scottt!  general comment for the board). 

[ Reply to This ]
James W - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 11:38 PM EST (#337662) #
I don't see any need for the poster to have been sarcastic. His point was to share a comment by the player. A quick check on google led to:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/redsox/2017/01/13/david-price-has-doubt-can-succeed-boston/NDaBB3sqD7I5WLFUJ0hpVN/story.html

“I’m staying right here,” Price said. “There was a reason I signed here and there’s a reason I’ll stay for six more years. I came here to win, and we’re going to win. If I go out there and pitch well, they’ll support me."
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 11:42 PM EST (#337663) #
The Jays and Bautista are close to a deal according to Jesse Sanchez on Twitter.

It made too much sense for both sides not to happen, but it looks like they finally got over whatever issues they had (assuming this is true).
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Sunday, January 15 2017 @ 11:48 PM EST (#337664) #
jerajapan, there is a quote from Price indicating that he's going to stay in Boston and not opt out. Of course, anything can happen in two years, but that's what the player is saying now. I'm not saying he will or he won't. I'm saying 4/127 for a 33 year old pitcher is hard to opt out of, especially with the mileage he already has on his arm, never mind two more 200+ IP seasons on top of that. He'd have to be positive that he could get more than that, and I don't know if that's a likely scenario. Who knows though.
[ Reply to This ]
scottt - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 05:57 AM EST (#337665) #
Price also said that this was the first year he had no fun pitching, that he has taken a lot of abuse from the Boston crowd and that he's thanking the bullpen catcher and the bullpen cop for protecting him.

The all seem very honest comments. Price is still a very likeable guy.

He doesn't think he'd be able to get more by opting out and he's not willing to take the chance.

[ Reply to This ]
China fan - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 06:54 AM EST (#337666) #
I said here, some weeks ago, that the Jays should be able to work out a deal for Bautista.  Now there are reports that a deal is imminent, and John Lott is reporting that the deal could be "an annual salary figure slightly above the $17.2-million qualifying offer."  (He doesn't know the length of the contract, but most people are assuming it's a one-year deal.)   If that's the number, or anything close to that, it would be inexcusable for the Jays to fail to sign him. Bautista is a fan favourite, a high OBP hitter, a slugger, and fits perfectly in the Jays lineup.  And his price has fallen to a bargain-level number.  There are no excuses for the Jays to miss this opportunity, and it seems likely that the Jays see it the same way.

One other note:  the likely Bautista deal, and the availability of Encarnacion until the Jays opted instead for Morales and Pearce, shows how wrong our basic assumptions can be.  As fans, most of us had assumed that Bautista and Encarnacion would be gone in 2017.  It turns out, in reality, that the Jays could have had both.  Conventional wisdom has a habit of proving wrong.
[ Reply to This ]
China fan - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 08:55 AM EST (#337667) #
Ken Rosenthal says the Jays and Bautista are discussing a two-year deal, in the range of $35-million to $40-million.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 09:48 AM EST (#337668) #
they had to do this.

but unfortunately this offseason is pretty much coming down to replacing Encarnacion with morales.

they could have knocked this offseason out of the park.

hopefully the batted ball data on morales gives us some career best performance out of him.
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 10:03 AM EST (#337669) #
I said all along that a two year deal for Bautista makes sense, so I'm glad that's where it is heading. One year would have been too short to justify losing a pick, and anything beyond two years would have been a risk due to his age. Two years seems like the logical compromise for both sides. Unfortunately that means having to see more of Jose playing the outfield, but his projection is all offense at this point anyway, so a bounce back season in that area will compensate a bit for his poor fielding.

Ultimately it comes down to Morales/Pearce replacing Edwin, and while the 3rd year on Morales is a clear overpay, I think overall I'm OK with the way it all played out given the circumstances (and we won't have to rehash the Edwin contract situation as it's been discussed to death).
[ Reply to This ]
BlueJayWay - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 10:04 AM EST (#337670) #
Stroman just tweeted something about 20 mins ago which suggests it's a done deal basically.
[ Reply to This ]
China fan - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 10:07 AM EST (#337671) #
Blair suggests the second year of the Bautista contract might actually be an option year, with only the first year guaranteed.

It's still early on this deal -- no reliable details are coming out, mostly guesswork -- but Stroman's reaction does indeed suggest that it's happening.

[ Reply to This ]
Chuck - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 10:12 AM EST (#337672) #
One year would have been too short to justify losing a pick

I floated this once before: Is it a lock that another team would have signed him to a contract meeting his higher-than-QO salary demands, thereby giving the Jays that draft pick? I can envision a scenario where Bautista twists in the wind until June.

[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 10:12 AM EST (#337673) #
One year and a team option would be perfect, but I'd be shocked if Bautista agreed to that.

I think Rosenthal's term/number is probably the truth (2 years, $35-40M).
[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 10:22 AM EST (#337674) #
Did anyone forget Ryan Merritt carving up the Jays in Game Five, throwing batting practise stuff? Did anyone forget Gibbon's, then Shapiro's, the Atkin's words - younger, faster, better defense, better balance?

Jose Bautista is a defensive liability and meets none of the above requirements. I would not sign him, money better spent elsewhere.
Edwin Encarnacion meets none of the above requirements. I am happy he's not here.
Kendrys Morales is a defensive liability, but he brings better balance.
Steve Pearce is faster and brings better defense.
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 10:23 AM EST (#337675) #
I don't know Chuck, I'm not sure Bautista would have risked missing half a season at age 36 to go back on the market at age 37. It's possible, and maybe that's why the Jays ultimately decided to bring him back, but that would have been a big gamble by Jose.

Then again, Bautista has a huge ego, so I could see him doing something like that. I guess we'll never know for sure.
[ Reply to This ]
Chuck - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 10:36 AM EST (#337676) #
Then again, Bautista has a huge ego, so I could see him doing something like that.

Ego, pride, call it what you will. I could see teams deciding to lowball him given the number of, admittedly lesser, RH power bats on the market. And for Bautista to take 12M, after turning down 17M, and a year after figuring he was worth 5/150, might have been too big a pill to swallow.

But of course I'm just guessing. All we know about the man is based on observations from afar, and untold numbers of assumptions.

[ Reply to This ]
PeterG - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 10:42 AM EST (#337677) #
FWIW, Jesse Sanchez said in interview on MLB network that Jose had better offers in $$$ and term, but that he very much wants to be in TO.
[ Reply to This ]
China fan - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 10:46 AM EST (#337678) #
"....Bautista has a huge ego...."

Let's see: one of baseball's best sluggers since 2010, with an OPS of .929 over the past six years; signed a five-year deal with the Jays that paid him substantially less than his true value; worked for years for the players union, which fights on behalf of (among others) baseball's lesser-paid players; switched to 3B for a few games when the Jays asked him in 2013; has given large sums to charity; set up an education fund to help under-privileged athletes go to university; dared to ask for a raise at the beginning of the 2016 season; dared to invoke his right to free agency; and is now apparently accepting an unexpectedly low contract to return to the Jays.   Yep, sounds like proof of a massive ego there.

In any event: don't most star athletes have an ego?  Or do we expect them all to conform to the ancient cliches from old Hollywood sports films of the humble gee-whiz kid who just quietly does what he is told?
[ Reply to This ]
Chuck - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 10:47 AM EST (#337679) #
Jesse Sanchez said in interview on MLB network that Jose had better offers in $$$ and term

Based on what? What Bautista's agent told him?

[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 10:49 AM EST (#337680) #
If the Jays sign a LH/SW Outfielder for Left Field to platoon with Upton, they might have enough balance, they might survive. If they decide they are done, we got issues.
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 10:51 AM EST (#337681) #
Jon Heyman ‏@JonHeyman
jays, bautista r finalizing deal. not fully done but expected to be 2 yrs, about $37M. rays, indians have been in bidding.

I wonder how much the Jays will have left to spend after this.
[ Reply to This ]
China fan - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 10:54 AM EST (#337682) #
From a Jeff Passan tweet:
 One thing has been abundantly clear: Jose Bautista really wanted to go back to Toronto. He's gonna turn down bigger-money offers elsewhere.

But sure, let's accuse him of being a "toxic clubhouse influence" with a "huge ego."  We can easily diagnose those characteristics through our television screens.

And I say this as someone who has criticized him for sometimes being too argumentative with umpires and too aggressive on the field.  He has occasionally hurt the Jays with those flaws.  But having a short temper and caring too much about the game isn't necessarily evidence of an abnormal ego or a toxic personality. 
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 10:58 AM EST (#337683) #
CF, I'm not sure you know what ego actually means if you have gotten so defensive about it. If you think Bautista lacks self confidence and is modest, then you are free to believe what you wish.
[ Reply to This ]
whiterasta80 - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 11:27 AM EST (#337684) #
SK, I think China's point, which I agree with completely, is that the media (and BB) have at times suggested that his ego is a unilaterally negative characteristic.

I personally think that it is a critical component of his success that occasionally hurts the team when he complains a little too loudly about a call. I've seen no evidence that his teammates look down upon it or that it causes rifts with others.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 11:35 AM EST (#337685) #
Only jays fans would be upset about bringing back arguably the best jay ever, who clearly loves playing here.

why do they hate him again? because he called out rogers for being cheap?
[ Reply to This ]
pubster - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 11:43 AM EST (#337686) #
If the Jays offered Roberto Alomar a 2 year $40 million contract to play 2B this off season I think many people would be upset.
[ Reply to This ]
pubster - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 11:44 AM EST (#337687) #
Oh, and I would love to see him come back!

But I can definitely see the other side of the argument.
[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 11:46 AM EST (#337688) #
I'll wait until the deal is official before commenting.

Dellin Betances' arbitration hearing should be fun.  The Yankees figure is one-half of Betances'.  I can see the Yankees doing a multi-year deal because Betances is very good and because you don't really want a nasty arbitration.  It is Betances' first year of arbitration eligibility- I do think that the Yankees have a good shot at winning (but my record in predicting these things is abysmal!).

[ Reply to This ]
dalimon5 - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 11:52 AM EST (#337689) #
"Let's see: one of baseball's best sluggers since 2010, with an OPS of .929 over the past six years; signed a five-year deal with the Jays that paid him substantially less than his true value; worked for years for the players union, which fights on behalf of (among others) baseball's lesser-paid players; switched to 3B for a few games when the Jays asked him in 2013; has given large sums to charity; set up an education fund to help under-privileged athletes go to university; dared to ask for a raise at the beginning of the 2016 season; dared to invoke his right to free agency; and is now apparently accepting an unexpectedly low contract to return to the Jays. Yep, sounds like proof of a massive ego there.

In any event: don't most star athletes have an ego? Or do we expect them all to conform to the ancient cliches from old Hollywood sports films of the humble gee-whiz kid who just quietly does what he is told?"

Your paragraph just gives more credence to the narrative of him having a big ego, even though you don't mention a thing about his on field attitude...bat flips, competitions with Andrew Jones, Darren O'Day, Odor, Merrit/Indians, etc.

Ego and Pride are kind of interchangeable here though. He's got an ego because of his attitude on the field which some people don't like and some people don't mind. He's also got tons to be proud of as a player with his numbers and accomplishments over the years that you mention. If he has any bit of an ego, he's earned every right to it. It's his bad attitude that people complain about and they mistake for an "ego."

I hear a lot of casual fans around me complaining about him as well as reading guys like Gossage, Showalter, Jones etc complaining about him. The bigger point you're making I agree with though. Those complainers are using an outdated cliche. Bautista is a smart, talented player with a chip on his shoulder, and that's hard to find. That's a bulldog mentality like Halladay and I find those players the most fun to watch compared to guys like Vernon Wells who may show emotion in week 6 of a 2 month slump. Bautista puts it all on the line, but he could easily silence most of his critics by toning down his open challenges to umpires and lengthy bat flips. Then again...he's had one of if not THE BEST set of eyes and plate discipline in baseball to challenge umpires and many of his prolonged bat flips, drops, dances were provoked from being thrown at.
[ Reply to This ]
PeterG - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 11:53 AM EST (#337690) #
I think that Betances is one of the most over rated players in MLB.
[ Reply to This ]
Richard S.S. - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 11:57 AM EST (#337691) #
Who and what Jose Bautista is - is basically flogging a dead horse. Everyone's opinion has been discussed ad nauseum. Time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time Jose Bautista has been discussed, since the first time he was a Jay. Nothing new here, this just causes ulcers and makes enemies.
[ Reply to This ]
pubster - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 12:01 PM EST (#337692) #
Marcus Stroman seems to like Jose

He tweeted:

"My brother. Back where you belong. Couldn't be happier. Appreciate you for guiding me and always being real!"
[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 12:03 PM EST (#337693) #
whiterasta80, his 'ego' (I think attitude is a better word) can be a negative characteristic (with umpires, players on other teams, etc), but that has nothing to do with the point I was making or the point CF was responding to. Ego, or pride, in this case was to illustrate that he values himself very highly. It was not mentioned in a negative connotation by me, or Chuck. I'm not sure who CF was directing his comment at, but he quoted mine, so that's why I was responding to.

His attitude towards umpires and things like that is a totally separate discussion.
[ Reply to This ]
dalimon5 - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 12:05 PM EST (#337694) #
Richard,

I think I speak for everyone on this board when I say we don't want you or anyone making enemies or getting ulcers. Let's all make sure to tone down the Bautista talk to safe levels until there is something new to talk about. For those who can't handle reading any more about Bautista, for your own safety please skip past the posts and posters who want to discuss the just-about-to-be-announced signing of one of the best Blue Jays in franchise history.

[ Reply to This ]
Jevant - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 12:05 PM EST (#337695) #
On the assumption he's back, I don't honestly understand how anyone isn't thrilled by this news.

Now, Angel Pagan or Brandon Moss or someone else better than Ezequiel Carrera for LF, please and thank you.

[ Reply to This ]
PeterG - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 12:12 PM EST (#337696) #
I think Upton will be a positive surprise and I am not sure another OF is necessary. Once Jose deal is done, I expect attention to be turned to pen(maybe a couple 2 mil guys) and starting pitching depth on minor league contracts. I do not expect 6 mil for any of the lefty relievers. Another catcher, on a minor league deal, will also be signed.
[ Reply to This ]
Mike Green - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 12:15 PM EST (#337697) #
I was thinking about similar players to Bautista.  I keep coming back to Frank Robinson. Obviously there is a completely different career path, but the batting approach (at least from F. Robby's time in Baltimore) was pretty similar- hovering over the plate and daring a pitcher to come inside, laying off crap and hammering everything else. 

Here's a cool F. Robby chart. It's a nice antidote to the theory that good pitching stops good hitting all the time.  Robinson faced all kinds of great pitchers in his best years in the National League between age 20 and 26- Warren Spahn, Lew Burdette, Sandy Koufax, Bob Gibson, Don Drysdale, Johnny Antonelli, Robin Roberts, Juan Marichal, Jim Perry.  He'd faced each of them more than 50 times, and nobody owned him.  Gibson and Drysdale held him in check (.230/.310/.420 ish slash lines), but that was about it.  The one guy who really got him (21 PAs, 2 Ws and 9Ks and a minisucle OPS) was a one-year wonder named Red Witt. 

[ Reply to This ]
SK in NJ - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 12:20 PM EST (#337698) #
"MLB Network Radio ✔ @MLBNetworkRadio
Steve Phillips, speaking to sources, reports Bautista deal has evolved into 1-year deal + team option. Gaining traction towards completion."

I don't trust Phillips as much as other media (Rosenthal, Heyman, etc), but if he's right about it being a 1+1 deal, then that would be an amazing move for the Jays.
[ Reply to This ]
uglyone - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 12:25 PM EST (#337699) #
probably a vesting option if true, with minimal qualifications. (500pa?)
[ Reply to This ]
PeterG - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 12:34 PM EST (#337700) #
Saunders nearing deal with Phillies according to MLBTR
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 12:37 PM EST (#337701) #
I love bringing Bautista back at 1/20 + team option. Guaranteed 2/40, not so much.

What I don't like is anyone discounting the validity of broadcast footage and media quotes of Bautista's negative intangibles, while using the same type of evidence to claim that Encarnacion absolutely wanted to come back to the Jays.
[ Reply to This ]
Parker - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 12:41 PM EST (#337702) #
And yeah, at this point the loss of a draft pick doesn't seem like a foregone conclusion at all. If unsigned to his satisfaction, Bautista may very well sit out until June.
[ Reply to This ]
PeterG - Monday, January 16 2017 @ 12:41 PM EST (#337703) #
If EE was so intent on being a Jay, he would be. Jays played it right imo while EE and Kinzer screwed up. What he was asking was way out of line for a DH.
[ Reply to This ]
The Front Office on Vacation Thread aka The Silence | 350 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.