Could someone explain why Liriano was allowed to pitch to Souza? If Barnes wasn't quite ready, there's alway visits to the mound to buy time. Almost like Gibby doesn't really care.

If Tropicana Field is only #14, I'm curious what #15 is. Oakland?

Morales wRC+ just went from 72 to 97 tonight.

This is more of the offense wet were hoping for. Too bad Bautista isn't part of it.

And Smoak now has a wRC+ of 119. Eschewing Encarnacion (wRC+ 99 with negative WAR) in favour of Smoak/Morales has worked out pretty well for the front office so far.

As one of the few people who defended the Smoak extension last July, I'm hoping it continues to work out for the Jays.

When it comes to Smoak I've very happy to have been wrong so far with him. Hope he keeps it up all year. If he could have a higher wRC+ than EE that would be super-funny.

If the Jays had resigned EE instead of Morales and then kept Bautista like they did would the team have been any better off? Not really.

shout out to barnes and loup for some key relief.

Great job by the bullpen as a whole: 5.1 IP with 2 H, 0 BB, 7 K, and one unearned run allowed.

I'm not sure I quite get the Latos move.

I'm not saying he was great, but I am saying we have a banged-up rotation with Happ and Sanchez uncertain, Stroman pulled from his last start, and damn few options below. Now Biagini is being pulled in to fill the 4th slot, and you're subbing in a reliever who has been flat-out terrible to take his place in the bullpen.

I don't see where the improvement comes from, to do this before Sanchez and Happ come back.

They really can't afford to give away any more wins, unless they've cut bait on the season entirely. And maybe they have, given the odds of seeing the post-season after a sub-.400 April.

Latos was toast - at this point a random AAA starter could be better. 3 starts, 2 disasters and 1 very good (6 IP 0 runs) which was against a NL team. Nah, a guy averaging 5 IP per start, 8 BB vs 10 SO, 11 runs in 15 IP. He was worth a flier to see if his old magic was there but he looked bad while pitching bad so both scouts and stats would say 'no' to him now.

Biagini has been good as a reliever and has shown he can have his innings increased. Many here wanted him stretched out for a 6th starter role and now he is there as #8. Who #9 is has yet to be determined (appears to be Bolsinger with TJ House also fighting to get here).

For comparison with past years starting pitching....
13 used: 2013, 1979, 2002
12 used: 1989, 2000, 2006, 2009, 2011, 2012, 2015
11 used: 1977, 1980, 1987, 1990, 1991, 1996, 2004, 2007, 2010
10 used: 1985, 1995, 1997, 2003
9 used: 1982, 1986, 1992, 1998, 2001, 2005, 2014
8 used: 1978, 1981*, 1983, 1984, 1988, 1993, 1999, 2008
7 used: 1994*, 2016

I put * beside 81 and 94 as both seasons lost about 1/3rd of the year to a strike. So last year was a big anomaly with just 7 and the Jays have a shot at the record of 13. The ML record is far, far higher though - 24 by the 1915 Philadelphia A's. 3 other times 20 was reached - 1967 by NY Mets, plus once in 1890 and in 1884 (when the rules were still in flux as Old Hoss Radbourne won 59 games, this was the year all restrictions on the delivery of a pitcher were removed, 6 balls to get a walk, mound only 50' away, and there were 3 major leagues).

So can the Jays get 25 starting pitchers this year? Lets hope not.

Archer is basically a 2 pitch pitcher and the slider is his best pitch.
I'm not surprised that lefties find ways to hit him.

Pillar, Bautista, Martin, isn't really  a great top 3 against him.
Maybe there's some positive history there, but Bautista struck out every time and Martin managed a walk, a strikeout and a double play.
Pillar, Carrera, Martin or Bautista and then Morales and Smoak would have been a better approach.
I get that Gibby is trying to find Pearce some AB but against Archer?
That can't be helpful.
Liriano has a nasty slider too and the Rays weren't having fun against him either.
Certainly not Kiermaier. Liriano just couldn't find the plate often enough whereas Archer threw a fist pitch fastball down the pipe almost every time. Still the Jays have a good record on days Liriano started.

Eventually Bautista will have to drop down in the lineup.
It's neat to have a balance lineup with 4 left bats, but I can't wait to have Tulo and Donaldson instead of Goins and Coghlan.

I'm not surprised that lefties find ways to hit him.

His career L/R OPS split is 679/630. Lefties do indeed have an advantage, but not a dramatic one.

i've always felt that archer is just a good pitcher, not great, who benefits especially much from his home park.

Edwin seemed to always get off to slow starts when he was a Jay, and he'd still end up with great numbers. I expect he'll start mashing soon, hopefully after Cleveland leaves Toronto next week.

It's still early, but even with all that young talent and Chris Sale, the Red Sox are a .500 club. The knives could be out for John Farrell if they don't start winning soon.

It seems "all that young talent" was more dependant than most thought on old Ortiz mysteriously becoming the best hitter in baseball at age 40.


And hey, should we start talking about what Pillar is doing yet or just keep quiet for now and not jinx it?

"....should we start talking about what Pillar is doing yet or just keep quiet for now and not jinx it?..."

There's been plenty of buzz about it since the start of spring training, so I don't think we need to be quiet about it.  It's very clear that Pillar has changed his approach at the plate.  His slugging numbers might eventually diminish (his .504 SLG is historically weird for him) but his excellent OBP of .357 might be more sustainable if he maintains the approach that has worked for his first 130 plate appearances.

It was only last season that most of us were touting Devon Travis as the team's ideal lead-off hitter.  Things can change fast.

did he bulk up this offseason? does that account for his power boost AND his defensive woes?

The Red Sox have posted a 15-14 record despite injuries to Price, Wright, Thornburg, and Smith, among others. It's a bit rich for fans of the 10-19 Blue Jays to be mocking Boston, especially when those fans spent the off-season arguing that the Jays could have been a perennial championship-calibre club, if only they'd committed $300m or so to Price and Encarnacion to make it happen.

It's also a bit rich to mock some non-existent straw man Bauxite because the Jays and Red Sox have underperformed in 29 games. 

It takes time to make sweeping conclusions.  I thought that I had enough evidence of Justin Smoak's mediocrity after nearly 3000 ABs in the bigs to conclude that his salary extension last year was foolish, and that's turned out to be incorrect so far.

EE could very well outperform his contract, as could Price.  Morales might prove me wrong yet, although his wRC+ of 97 has me pretty worried. 

And I don't think anyone saw Pillar coming, but it's exciting to have a legit leadoff hitter ... I haven't watched enough games to conclude due to various other playoffs and the ugly start, but does anyone have an opinion on the negative fWAR ratings he's getting for fielding and base running this year?  It seems to me evidence of the unreliability of these stats ... when I have watched he looks like the same ace in CF to me. 

"Eventually Bautista will have to drop down in the lineup."

Have been thinking the same. Buck and Pat have been saying it's timing issue, which actually makes sense because his bat speed has seemed to be slower, which would cause timing issues.

His problems aren't babip related - it's actually above his career average and his eye is still good - he's not chasing. There's just a massive amount of swing and miss.

"The Red Sox have posted a 15-14 record despite injuries to Price, Wright, Thornburg, and Smith, among others."

yeah, injuries to a #6sp and a couple RP with one good year on their resumes isn't exactly something to cry about.

I've seen Pillar drop at least 3 tough running catches that he usually makes, so I can't compeltely dismiss his defesnive stats as just small sample noise.

It's been bad all right.  Bautista's been swinging and missing much, much more often at fastballs in the zone.  I'd give him a day off here and there, and get him DHing with Morales at first base at least once or twice a week.  At this point, Dwight Smith Jr.  looks like he would be a better player at least against RHPs; you want to give Bautista another month, but missing fastballs in the zone is a serious problem.  Devon Travis' issues are much easier to deal with (it seems to me).  He's gotta follow the advice of Daft Punk- get lucky.  The major difference between his performance this year and previous is his BABIP (.192 this year vs. .333 career).  It's a mystery.  His LD rate is much higher than his career rate.  His IFFB rate is lower.  Darwin Barney's BABIP is .400 so it looks to me like he's stolen a few of Travis' hits.  Not nice.

As for Biagini to the rotation, I'll give a thumbs up to that decision.  I've always been in favour of using the major league bullpen as an apprenticeship for the rotation.  Biagini has been using all four of his pitches (fastball, slider, curve and change) often enough (at least 10% of the time) and effectively.  He threw over 40 pitches in his last outing.  Perfect time to throw 50-60 tomorrow.   I hope that Biagini's move to the rotation opens up a spot for Danny Barnes to assume his role.  Barnes is, I think, the 3rd best reliever on the club.

because his bat speed has seemed to be slower, which would cause timing issues.

I agree. His career K rate is 18%. This year it's 30%. He's having to do more guessing at the plate, starting his swing earlier than he used to. It's not pretty. This was a man who recently felt he had 5 years left in the tank. I don't say that to mock him, just to point out that no one is immune to the ravages of time, sound diet and fitness regime notwithstanding.

"with one good year on their resumes"

Yes, just like Biagini.

Even if Wright is a #6 SP, for a team to lose an ace (as you've described Price), a #6 SP, and two well-regarded young relievers with one year on their resume, and still go 15-14 to start the season, is pretty respectable.

One other thing the Red Sox have lost is any semblance of power. Dead last in iso. On the bright side, their hitters probably aren't getting any extra PED tests.

I came to make a post about Biagini and Barnes and their roles and I see Mike has already done it and done it better than I would have, so coke to Mike.

Yeah Travis has hit into bad luck. He's taken over Tulo' s mantle of "Blue Jay who drills a ball right at a fielder for an out at least once a game."

"Even if Wright is a #6 SP, for a team to lose an ace (as you've described Price), a #6 SP, and two well-regarded young relievers with one year on their resume, and still go 15-14 to start the season, is pretty respectable."

I guess. But i'm still not impressed by The Next Great Dynasty so far in the post-roidtiz era.

Seems like Travis is finally warming up a bit. His first 15gms he sported a horrawful -28wrc+, but his last 10 he's posted a 94wrc+...and that's with a still-low .258babip that still needs some correcting.

Hopefully he continues upwards.

It looks like Estrada is pitching his way out of the Jays budget range for a contract extension. If they aren't going to rebuild then I keep hoping for a 2-3 year extension of Liriano or Estrada.

And not so much:(

"But i'm still not impressed by The Next Great Dynasty so far in the post-roidtiz era"

Age 22-24 players Betts (102 wRC+), Bogaerts (117 wRC+), and Benintendi (130 wRC+) were 6/17 with two doubles and a walk in today's Boston win. Those three form a pretty good foundation of young positional players. If Price and Sale can stay healthy (big if), the Red Sox should be competitive over the next couple of years at least. On the other hand, Bradley Jr. is struggling and the team has traded away quite a bit of young talent over the last couple of years. So they may end up being less dynastic than some people thought.

The Yankees, on the other hand...

It takes time to make sweeping conclusions.  I thought that I had enough evidence of Justin Smoak's mediocrity after nearly 3000 ABs in the bigs to conclude that his salary extension last year was foolish, and that's turned out to be incorrect so far.

EE could very well outperform his contract, as could Price.  Morales might prove me wrong yet, although his wRC+ of 97 has me pretty worried. -jerjapan

Just checked the expected wOBA leaderboard on baseball savant, using statscast, and it's pretty interesting. Here's a quote from the article on Fangraphs describing the process.
"MLB rolled out an expected wOBA calculation as part of their recent Baseball Savant update, so you can search for an xWOBA leaderboard from their site now. They take the expected outcomes on balls in play from the Statcast data (and add in actual walks, hit by pitches, and strikeouts) in order to give an idea of what a player’s performance would look like if their outcomes had matched the probabilities based on their exit velocity and launch angle." - http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/xander-bogaerts-is-a-very-weird-good-player/

Anyway... Morales is at .386 (#30/191 expected, but .311 actual), Encarnacion at .384 (#33), and Smoak at .380 (#35 expected, .343 actual). There are probably a bunch of players with fewer than, but close to, 75 AB who are kicking butt, but those are encouraging numbers (and a reminder that it's still early). Bautista has been a not as awful as in reality, I expect because of walks .315 (122) to .274
Pillar might be expected for regression from .370 actual to .322 (108) expected, and Travis is at .332(79), so pretty close to last year's performance expected, much better than his current .206 wOBA.

Just a reminder that roughly a year ago (May 14 2016 to be precise), Justin Smoak was hitting .314/.448/.500. Usually, players turn out to be who you always thought they were.

Magpie, I'm pretty sure that's what we are talking about ... my last comment stated that I base my Smoak opinions on nearly 3000 MLB abs.  and that I 'might' be wrong in assuming he's made positive changes.  My concern, the reason for my initial post, was posters concluding that fans are idiots for wanting the team to spend more money based on one month of two teams records.

also worth noting that Smoak is a regular instead of a part time player, and that numerous recent articles at Fangraphs are talking about Smoak as a breakout candidate.  I can post links if you want.

Encarnacion will almost certainly outperform Smoak in 2017, even with defense factored in, but we're almost 20% of the way through the season and EE has posted 0 WAR to Smoak's 0.4 WAR. Of course, Edwin is being paid to be roughly a 3 WAR player, while Smoak's salary suggests that the Jays are hoping to get around 0.5 WAR from him, with 1 WAR (a career high) being a good outcome for all concerned.

Smoak is 30 years old. He's experienced, but not yet squarely in his decline years. I think he could have a respectable year. It's at least promising that the first month of 2017 didn't pick up where the second half of 2016 left off (75 wRC+).

On the other hand, bad hitters can crater quickly (see Gose, Anthony). There is always the possibility that things could go south, and stay south, for Smoak this year.

Yup, Smoak could tank anytime.  All my posts indicate that I believe that.

My issue with your comments Greenfrog is that these are all separate decisions, and should be looked at in isolation - Smoak's deal didn't impact the decision to sign or not sign EE.  I don't like how some fans of the admin sometimes package all their preferred deals together - value signings of veterans with potential upside - and present them as composite evidence that riskier approaches - trading for or signing veterans, specifically - is clearly the wrong approach.

I think talking about each deal or contract in isolation is the best way to address the issues being raised.  The Dickey trade sucked.  the JD trade was awesome. The Price trade was an overpay, and my least favourite of them all.   The first Bautista contract was great.  The Morales deal appears to be a fail.  Smoak may yet have value. 

Also, we have had many discussions around here about how WAR undervalues the DH vs. the position player - the Morales deal was frequently defended from this position - but of course, that applies to the EE vs. Smoak conversation as well. 

There is also value in keeping your powder dry by *not* making deals that are enticing but unwise. After the 2015 season, some people wanted to sign Price, and then spend what it took to secure extensions for EE and Bautista -- all to keep open what was perceived to be a rare window of contention. Had all this been done before the 2016 season, the Jays might have committed $350-400m to those three players. We now know that would have been a likely miscalculation, and quite possibly a disastrous one.

Anthopoulos made some great trades and some poor ones, but he was able to acquire a lot of good young talent, which enabled the organization to keep making trades (like the four-for-one Donaldson swap) while maintaining a quality farm system (of course, he went for broke with the Tulo and Price trades in 2015).

Agreed, there is value in a more conservative approach... but that's a worst case scenario that you outline, no?  I don't see any organization, with any philosophy, having a $350-400 million offseason for those players,especially not with EE and Bautista being offense-only guys in their decline years, in an environment increasingly aware of the value of defense.

If Price wasn't injured, I'd still be arguing that his deal was a great move by the Sox, and it still may prove to be a positive.  Obviously though, the injury risk in a real factor in long-term commitments.  It's a roll of the dice at the end of the day, when it comes to injuries.  If your org is comfortable with that risk, I feel there is a market advantage to be had, but you've got to be comfortable with that risk, and plan for negative outcomes.  That may have been AA's biggest flaw - he wasn't so good with the long term risk management.

EE's performance so far this seasons fits in well with a theory I've held for many years now, that guys who sign really big money contracts with new teams often struggle in the first year with the new team. A cynic would say that they slack off after getting the big contract, but I don't buy that. These guys are, for the most part, extremely dedicated to their craft and take a lot of pride in their performance. I think the opposite is true, that they put a lot of pressure on themselves to justify their new contract with the new team and prove themselves to their teammates, coaches, etc. I deliberately avoid guys that sign these big contracts with new teams in pools and have usually not regretted it. Dexter Fowler is experiencing a similar struggle with the Cubs, as did the Cubs other big ticket OF acquisition last year, Jason Heyward. I would be interested in seeing a proper study done on all big money free agents who switch teams, say over the last 20 years, to see what percentage of them underperform in the first year of the new contract. If anybody knows of such a study, I would love to see it. Be nice to know if I'm correct or if the flops just are more salient and I remember them more often than the successes.

I haven't seen any studies but I always thought this was the case. I thought Steve Pearce, while not a big name acquisition, was gripping the bat too tight starting off the year. I think it's only natural that an athlete wants to show his team mates that he's worth the money and can help the team, and tries too hard as a result.

A year ago, Smoak was hitting .314/.448/.500 but how much of his decline after that can be attributed to Bautista and Donaldson playing DH while he sat on the bench?

EE's performance so far this seasons fits in well with a theory I've held for many years now, that guys who sign really big money contracts with new teams often struggle in the first year with the new team... I would be interested in seeing a proper study done on all big money free agents who switch teams, say over the last 20 years, to see what percentage of them underperform in the first year of the new contract. If anybody knows of such a study, I would love to see it. Be nice to know if I'm correct or if the flops just are more salient and I remember them more often than the successes.

There is a ton out there that a quick google search will turn up. I didn't bother checking any of the PDF's. Some related studies in other major sports as well. I don't know how much they account for age, injury, etc. Or compare younger free agents vs older ones. Here's a few links.
http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2012/05/contract_year_effect_do_sports_free_agents_try_harder_.html
http://www.beyondtheboxscore.com/2014/3/6/5473868/player-performance-in-their-free-agent-year-an-analysis
http://www.espn.co.uk/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/68102/buyer-beware-how-big-free-agents-did-in-their-first-season-after-signing-mega-contracts
http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/01/max-scherzer-james-shields-free-agent-pitchers-contracts-100-million-mlb
You could probably just look at the fangraphs profile pages of a bunch of people listed in the articles and find links to articles talking about this kind of thing as well.

I have no idea what a -28wrc+ mean. What's the formula again?
I'm still puzzled that there's no stats that express poor performance with imaginary number yet.
I'm sure it's coming.

Scott, if you are criticizing the wRC+ scale for running into the negatives, I'm with you.  Would it be so hard to run the scale from 0 (the batter who always makes an out) to infinity (the batter who always reaches base and therefore no outs in the denominator)?  It seems to me if wRC+ is entirely average performance, a wRC+ of 75 ought to be 3/4 of average and a wRC+ of 150 should be one and a half times average.

The lineup for today against Alex Cobb has Bautista in RF and Pearce in LF behind Biagini.  Personally, I'd give Bautista the day off and give Carrera another start.  Bautista has been playing every day, he's 36 years old, and it hasn't been working for him.  I would change it up. 

Smoak's nearly 3000 previous AB's suggest that what happened after early May of last year was the norm, not what happened before it.

Part time usage doesn't explain Smoak's performance. After coming up part way through the year in his first season he then proceeded to play every day for the remainder of that year and the next three and didn't hit a lick. If anything, history suggests (notwithstanding the results this year) that his best usage is as a platoon bat, pinch hitter hitting from the left side.

It's interesting to peruse Fangraphs' batted ball and plate discipline stats for Smoak. For example, he's pulling the ball significantly less (39.5%) than he has over his career (48%). Also, 38.2% of his batted balls have been hit to center field (career 31.8%), with 22.4% of them hit to the opposite field (career 20.3%). This might just be a sample size issue, or it might indicate that he has modified his approach at the plate this year.

Hitting to LF in the air was death in Safeco so I wouldn't be surprised if he is consciously less pull oriented from the left side.

negative ops+/wrc+ is a byproduct of setting the constant as 100 = league average. (wrc+ just built on top of the ops+ model to minimize confusion).....and that decision (basically just multplyinh the formula output by 100) was itself just an attempt to make the numbers as easy to use as possible by giving a whole number to work with instead of decimals.


the basic formula for these stats is very simple: (player stat / league average stat - 1) x 100

Smoak will probably regress but despite not particularly liking the extension, I find the furor around it absurd. for 2 years/$8M, Smoak has to be barely above replacement to make the contract worth it. It's the kind of money teams pay for utility players. In the early going, the approach of the front office has been pretty thoroughly vindicated.They recognized a team on the cusp of decline and decided not to try to throw long-term resources on to that fading window. They took a lot of flak from fans for this (Fans always think the good times will never end) but management never get enough credit for what they don't do and not signing aging players to expensive long-term contracts and not trading away more top prospects has allowed the Jays to be in a much better place long-term.

I find the furor around it absurd. for 2 years/$8M, Smoak has to be barely above replacement to make the contract worth it.

I can't speak for anyone but myself, but could the furor have been less about the money than the idea that Smoak was seemingly settled upon as a solution to the problem of who plays first base?

"....the approach of the front office has been pretty thoroughly vindicated.They recognized a team on the cusp of decline and decided not to try to throw long-term resources on to that fading window...."

Thoroughly vindicated?  They invested $86-million in new contracts and acquisitions for 2017 and future seasons, and so far it's only yielded a last-place team.   If they knew the team was "on the decline," why did they spend so much?  If they knew the team was going to be a loser this season, they should have begun the rebuild in the off-season without spending so much on a half-hearted effort.  Instead it's pretty clear that they didn't "recognize" the Jays as a losing team; they saw the Jays as an unpredictable team, but they decided to give it a shot.

And the notion that $86-million is not "long-term resources" is an odd one.  Sure, you can say that it's better than a $150-million contract to Bautista, but that was not the sole alternative.  They chose to spend a substantial amount, but the moves haven't worked (so far).  It's misleading to try to minimize this investment by comparing it to an imaginary amount that was never seriously considered.

So let's set aside the after-the-fact spin, in which we try to justify moves with 20-20 hindsight.  The reality is this:  the front office, like most of us, believed the Jays had a chance at the playoffs, so they invested $86-million to try to achieve it.  Most of the moves were pretty smart ones, but they didn't work out, mostly for reasons of injury and bad luck.

furor is a pretty strong word  - that's a good way to put it Chuck. 

Smoak is no utility player though ... he can only play 1B, and in this era of increasing value on versatility, it felt to me like we were clogging up the roster.  The same concern drove my reaction over the Morales deal, in fact Morales exacerbated it, given our prior commitment to Smoak and our seeming disinterest in Jose and EE.  Morales' deal was the contract that provoked something akin to fury in me.

I will agree with you Greenfrog that playing hardball with Jose seems to have been a wise move given his startling apparent decline.  I say startling because it seems to be so rapid, and he looked so good in the Spring.  But I do continue to think that EE will prove a much better value deal than Morales.  Smoak?  It's looking increasingly like a wise, patient move - so I was in the wrong on that one. 

BTW, why is fWAR so negative on Smoak's D?

There's nothing wrong with decimals. Nobody has a problem grasping 0.5%.

Looking at OPS+ it's actually ( (OBP/league OBP + Slugging/league slugging) -1 ) x 100.

You could do OPS/league OPS and there would be no minus in there.
However, somebody thought it was important to average OBP and slugging separately and subtract a constant to make it look like a single ratio. Why not just do (OBP/league OBP) * 50 + Slugging/League slugging * 50?

Btw Biagini looks even better than I was hoping as a starter.

you seem to have very strong preferences as to how your stats are presented.

if the front office thought the team was about to decline, they should have got on with rebuilding. they halfassed it instead.

And i don't know in which world spending $100m on replacement value vets is "vindicating".

"we're gonna spend $100m on mediocrity and when the team fails we'll be vindicated!"

If you is me, I like numbers that means something.

For example, litre/100km is a meaningful measure of fuel usage. It's an area in that measure the surface of a thread of gasoline spread out over the distance traveled. ;)

Too bad we didn't sign Fowler. Then we could have accused the FO of spending $200 million on replacement level players.

Maybe in a month Tulo, Donaldson, Happ and Sanchez will be back and healthy.
Then if Travis, Bautista and Pearce aren't contributing, things might get a little complicated as you can't trade non-producers. They could release Bautista, send Travis down to Buffalo and reduce Pearce's usage.
That's about it, really.

"If you is me, I like numbers that means something."

doesn't sound like you do, to be honest.

These days, my favourite truism in baseball is that nobody really knows anything (especially me). 2017 is living proof of this.

Consider: the general consensus was that the Jays stood a good chance of being the wild card. Nobody predicted that they would fall down a well.

Also: almost everyone (including me) thought that the Smoak deal was a total waste of money. The sample size is small, and might still vindicate the general opinion, but right now, he's not doing that bad. He's not drawing enough walks to be actually good, but he's not a waste of oxygen.

One thing in particular is that his two-strike numbers have improved. In 2016, if he was down two strikes, he batted .145 with 112 K in 187 plate appearances. (And I would guess that all of them were from him flailing at a breaking ball and missing it by about a foot and a half.) This year, he's up to .192 with 21 strikeouts in 54 plate appearances (which isn't all that bad with two strikes). He might have made an adjustment or two. The league will likely adjust back, but you never know.

Finally: while the Jays are still in a very big hole, the worst is probably over. I was at the game where Happ's arm blew up, the Jays got clobbered, and they fell to 2-10. At this point, and particularly when Tulo and Sanchez went down too, I was anticipating a level of failure of historic magnitude, rivalling the 1962 Mets or whichever Tigers team it was that lost all those games. After all, they were about to endure the Schedule From Hell:

- Boston at home
- a trip out to Los Angeles without a travel day at either end
- a visit to St. Louis, again without a day off
- straight back home to face Tampa Bay, their historical nemesis
- again, without a day off, out to Yankee Stadium
- finally a day off, but yet another trip to Tampa Bay

They started this trek with a 2-11 record, and it would not have surprised me if they had gone something like 5-14 in those 19 games, leaving them 7-25 and on course for 125 losses. Instead, they have gone 9-9, which even some of the better Jays teams would have had trouble doing.

I don't think there's a lot of grounds for optimism just yet. They're still not scoring runs, Bautista is looking overmatched, and they still have to patch and bail the starting rotation (though Biagini looked awesome today). But Gibbons is starting to sort the bullpen out, the team defense is still good, and Kevin Pillar has suddenly become a hitter. The Jays face weaker opposition now, and might have a chance to dig themselves out of their hole. Or they might lose five in a row and drop even further back. Like I said before, nobody knows anything.

Bautista is looking overmatched

Indeed. You see him now and you can't even imagine him getting a hit ever again. There was a time where you felt that a homerun was a mere inevitability. It just seemed so easy.

lexomatic, thanks for the links about players declining after free agency. I found the 3rd one to be just what I was looking for. It showed that players signing big contracts with new teams (they defined "big" as $50 million plus) lost about 1/3 of their value in their first year after signing the new contract. That's an even bigger drop than I thought it would be. There were almost as many players who fell so far they became replacement level players as there were players who improved.

"nobody really knows anything"

If the person who decided that "nobody really knows anything" was a truism didn't know anything, doesn't this leave open the possibility that someone, somewhere, knows something?

The only time incorrectly isn't spelled incorrectly is when it's spelled incorrectly.. :-)

I'm getting dizzy.

doesn't sound like you do, to be honest.

7 years of university doing advanced math. Non-linear equations, transformations, dynamic modeling, cryptography, stochastics, fractals, morphological operations. Obviously, the numbers are presented as the sum of 2 ratios minus 1 to give them a larger range, so that most of the players are not clustered in a 90-110 OPS+ range, but the way it's done is still arbitrary and the final number does no represent anything real.

Now don't get me started on the absurd non-linear equations they use in the Ontario taxes calculations.

Latos  and Lawrence had 6 starts and went 0-4 with ERAs of 6.60 and 8.78. If Biagini can be himself in the rotation and Sanchez is back in the weekend, there is still cause for optimism. Danny Barnes can cover a lot of what Biagini was doing in the pen.

I'm less optimistic on Bautista. He was always great against division rivals and often seemed to struggle against average pitching from other divisions. He's been terrible in the division. He needs to start going the other way on away pitches. It still looks like he wants to hit 30 homeruns and it's not going to happen. However, if Pillar can keep getting on base in front of Donaldson, good things will happen.

"the final number does no represent anything real."

sure it does.

Yup, Bautista is looking bad again after looking pretty good for a couple of weeks. Who knows what's going on really, but it's hard not to think age is a factor at this point. He is 36.5 years old after all. Still, it'd be a bit unusual for him to fall totally off a cliff at this point, if only because his arm looks legitimately better than it looked last year and the year before. Of course, arm strength is only one part of the equation.

Maybe it's just a question of him adjusting to the age-related changes. Let's hope that's the case, for all our sakes. Maybe this is crazy, but sometimes I wonder if Bautista could actually be a good slap hitter if he wanted to be... he seems to have good bat control when he wants to (like when he chooses to poke a ball to right field he can often do so successfully), and his knowledge of the strike zone / pitch recognition is still a plus.

Hopefully that 18 inning game last night tired out the Yankees a bit.

Sadly, I was thinking along similar lines with Bautista. Looking like he might to have to revert back to the Pirates version.

Will Gibby ever drop him down in the lineup? Not that we have any scorching hitters that deserve to be moved up.

One final thought on this series: why did the schedule maker send the Blue Jays into Tampa Bay twice within slightly less than a month? How on earth could the Rays promote these games to their fans? "You didn't see the Jays last month! Come see them this month!"

If the person who decided that "nobody really knows anything" was a truism didn't know anything, doesn't this leave open the possibility that someone, somewhere, knows something?

"I am lying to you."

On a positive note, Sanchez threw a 33 pitch bullpen session with no problems, including curveballs that caused the original issue. Supposed to pitch at extended tomorrow and if all goes well, he may start on the weekend with the Jays.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/mlb/aaron-sanchez-encouraged-pain-free-bullpen-session/

And one more somewhat positive:

"The Blue Jays still aren't scoring many runs, but Kendrys Morales has been a clutch addition. Of his six home runs this season, four have come in the seventh inning or later, and each of those late home runs has either tied the game or given the Blue Jays the lead. On Friday, he hit a game-tying, seventh-inning homer off Chris Archer and followed it up with a go-ahead blast in the eighth off Jumbo Diaz. Between this year and last, he has 18 home runs in the seventh inning or later, the second most in the majors behind Edwin Encarnacion (19).-- Sarah Langs, ESPN Stats & Information"

Mat Latos has cleared waivers and (surprise) returned to Buffalo.

Mike Bolsinger gets the start for the Jays tomorrow night.  They need to remove someone from the 40-man roster to make room for him.  I would vote for Darrell Ceciliani to be dropped.  He is very unlikely to be claimed by anyone.  And with the emergence of Dwight Smith Jr., the Jays have an outfielder available in Buffalo if they need one.  Ceciliani is surplus to requirements.

The alternative is to drop a pitcher, such as Casey Lawrence, Chris Smith, Leonel Campos or newly claimed Cesar Valdez.   But I think the Jays need their pitching depth this year.

More great news - Russell Martin to the DL, according to Shi Davidi.

Ohlman called up. Now 2 players have to be DFA , one today, one tomorrow. I would agree with DFAing Ceciliani. He will clear in all likelihood. As for the other, I would either DFA Chris Smith or place him on 60 day DL. I would prefer to hold on to Lawrence for the time being.

The 25 man roster is totally obsolete. When will the powers that be come to their senses and change to 27.

Between this year and last, he has 18 home runs in the seventh inning or later, the second most in the majors

It's a good thing those late-game home runs have more value than home runs in the first few innings. I'm glad MLB introduced that revised scoring rule.

ha, nice one.

Bolsinger is the best choice to start IMO, and while I'd be fine with Ceciliani getting dropped from the 40 man given his start to the season and the seeming emergence of Dwight Smith, why not the newly claimed Valdez?  His was a puzzling claim ...  reliever Chris Smith has more value than either of those guys IMO .... what's the status of his injury?

I guess the org thinks Ohlman can survive behind the plate - MLB debut, good luck!

I would keep Valdez if possible as he is a starter who pitched 180 innings last year to a 3,25 ERA in AAA. He is needed in Buffalo and may be needed in TO at some point. As he has options remaining, it was an excellent claim which makes much sense to me. I would drop Ramirez if one of the recent claims needs to be DFA. Staring depth is way more important than relief depth at this time.

Lawrence has been designated. I disagree with this move and hope he is not claimed.

Shoulder injuries can be pesky. Martin is pretty tough, so if he's going on the DL, he may be out for a while.

The Martin injury is a bad break for the Jays -- nobody can replace Martin's handling of the pitchers -- but it's a good opportunity for Mike Ohlman.  I've liked him since I first saw him in the spring.  He has all kinds of slugging power (SLG of .594 this year) and he can find ways to get on base (15 walks in 69 ABs this year, boosting his OBP to an impressive .388 for Buffalo).  He's still fairly young, just 26.   The real question is his defence.  If he can't control the running game, the Jays will have to use mostly Maile at catcher, despite Maile's inability to hit.

A Jays catcher not named Russell Martin should finally get a hit in the next week or two - I hope.

That's one MVP candidate and four above average players out at the same time. Treading water would be an accomplishment.

Good call hypoboble ... 1 for 35 from the backups thus far. 

Lawrence was a great story, but I totally disagree that we have a serious need for AAA starter depth, even with the injuries.  Bolsinger is a valid option, Lawrence is unlikely to be claimed, and House is another AAAA guy impressing right now.  Oberholzer is also looking viable.  I was complaining about AAA depth in the offseason, but the FO did fill Buffalo out nicely - good catching depth, pitching, utility guys - perhaps an extra CF option would have helped, but if your top prospect haven't gotten past AA, this is the kind of AAA team I like - lots of MLB experience, and a variety of skill sets. 

I've asked this before, but anyone know what's up with Jon Berti?

I'm guessing Lawrence takes the hit because somebody else has passed him on the chart. Probably House.

You need to consider possible future needs when looking at staring depth. It is possible that 2 starters could be traded and will need to be replaced in July.

House will not be called up anytime soon imo as he can not be sent back down without clearing waivers which he would not do. He will only be brought up when they are sure he will stay up.

PeterG, I think you are overvaluing AAA pitching depth a bit ... sure, we don't want to toss House to the curb, but he's a fungible guy.  And like I said when you were talking about a possible trade of JD - if we trade two starters in July, it doesn't matter one bit who starts for us.  We could just buy a Wade Leblanc, which is what Seattle did last year from us when they needed pitching depth.

ChinaFan, I think it was you last year that I disagreed with - you were suggesting that Leblanc could help the big club, and I thought Leblanc's 87mph FB couldn't cut it.  You were totally right - he was solid for Seattle and he's been another Searage success story in Ptitsburgh. 

I had to google the spelling for Searage, which is worth doing if you are a fan of a quality mustache through the years.