Oh: besides process and dumb luck. You can also have your own license to print money, if all else fails. (Hello, New York!) But the Blue Jays have clearly decided that's not for them. Or you can try losing 324 games in three years and see what you get in the draft. (Hello, Houston!) Atkins knows he won't be allowed to try that here. He'd be out the door before it ever got that far.
Still, I believe the drafting and developing strategy is the best for continued success over a longer period. Sure many organizations are trying to implement the same strategy- not that unusual in any industry- so the Jays have to do it better. And have some good luck.
On the other hand, crazy trades whose success is totally reliant on good luck are not at all helpful. And demoralizing for fans.
“We won’t have game-changing talent in our system until it’s doing it in the major leagues,” said Atkins.
“Oftentimes, I think that the best stories in baseball happen from depth. We work very hard to identify just one player and project when we acquire our first-round pick or when we’re targeting a player for a trade with a magnitude of Marcus Stroman. Those players typically have higher chances to have that game-changing talent, but there are all too often stories across baseball where players are coming into a player development system and making significant strides and becoming players like (Jacob) deGrom, or players like Corey Kluber, or players like Mike Clevinger, who didn’t have quite the pedigree.
“We’re confident we’re going to have a story from that group and sure, is the likelihood that Nate Pearson and Simeon Woods Richardson and Alek Manoah have a higher likelihood of being game-changing? Sure. But we feel as though that Patrick Murphy and Anthony Kay and (others) from that group (of pitchers in the system) are going to have an incredible story that becomes game-changing talent.”
I have zero problems by my supposed reasoning for making the Sogard trade.
In their minds, the only smart thing to do is to keep gathering as many lottery tickets as possible and waiting to hit jackpots.
They may be right.
True, but if you give up too much to get what you want, it reduces your inventory for future trades. And given Fisher’s position within the Astro organization, I think they gave up too much.
Ross Atkins says the Blue Jays now have a list of 20 pitchers who "check all the boxes" to be starters at the big league level.
This was another quote from the immediate post-deadline Arash Madani interview
It was widely mocked by the Twitterverse, but it was in the same context as the Kluber luck quote.
IOW, not that they believe they are 20 MLB starters deep, but believe they have at least 20 candidates for potentially a couple "luck" above-average breakout MLB starters to fill the rotation.
I thought the mocking of the quote was unfair. This quantity SP model was essentially AA's entire drafting philosophy, at the expense of any homegrown position players beyond Kevin Pillar. It basically came down to AA believing he could buy hitters but pitching was either unobtainable or at least more valuable as prospect assets in trades to get other assets you need
This quantity method did lead to some good SP (Syndergaard, Stroman, Sanchez), but these guys were all 1st rounders (though mostly late-to-comp round picks) showing it was still hard to get lucky with lower assets. He also signed Osuna, but he was an expensive, highly ranked IFA. Even lesser successes like Joe Musgrove and Daniel Norris were high picks/expensive signings.
The quantity/pitching heavy focus did lead to other pitchers, but not many above-average diamonds in the rough for less regarded guys (Boyd, Graveman, Desclafani, Castro)
The thing is, it doesn't matter. let's say, unlikely as it is, Sogard has become an amazing hitter at 33, he's still a free agent and some team would want to pay more than the Jays would next year. He's 33 and he is blocking prospects from playing. I think with pitchers there is a lot of luck. Where I generally disagree with both AA and Atkins is that I would almost never be drafting pitchers in the first round. There is so much flukiness that you can get guys later that explode. Grab premium position prospects and pitchers in bulk.
Of course, now AA is in Atlanta, an organization almost fully built by the talented and sketchy GM before him, and they will make the playoffs. I love Atlanta due to growing up on TBS, so I'm happy for him to have landed there, but I already am prepared for a thousand articles about how much the Jays screwed up if they do well.
Personally, I would've loved to have seen a combination of Shapiro and AA actually work out. Shapiro's organizational building and development strategies combined with AA's trading? Would've been a great combo.
The 20 SPs that are checking all the boxes have to be throughout the minors.
Manoah (University) is not ready now. He should start in Dunedin in 2020, like Zeuch and Pearson did. They are currently in AAA and AA which is good considering their injury time. Pearson 89 IP so far in the minors. Zeuch also slowed by injury.
So both if healthy from the beginning could have been promoted to the Jays already.
I hope Manoah stays healthy and is as good. He could make it in his 3rd year, so half way through 2021.
Also: Anthopoulos fought for his job. Recall the mid-season of 2015. Rogers is negotiating with Shapiro to replace Beeston (and Shapiro, unlike Beeston, was a baseball guy who would certainly not leave Cleveland if he wan't going to have involvement in the baseball side of things). The team on the field is sputtering along at .500, still riding the Treadmill of Mediocrity. He'd taken his big swing for the fences in the 2012-13 off-season and his team simply crapped the bed. He kept trying and after the two big trades at the end of July the ballclub and unexpectedly went on the greatest hot streak in franchise history. (By definition, that's something unexpected.) It didn't save this job - what Shapiro had already agreed to take to leave Cleveland and what Anthopoulos wanted in order to stay (the same autonomy he'd had with Beeston) were fundamentally incompatible. But he'd kept swinging, he'd made a success of it, and he was out of work for five minutes. He'd made his bones! So he's somebody else's GM now.
Whereas Ricciardi, with the writing on the wall heading into 2009, three of his starting pitchers already lost for the season before it even began (and a fourth starter lost in the very first week) - simply shrugged his shoulders and gave up. And has never worked as a GM since.
Sometimes, I think AA was the luckiest GM in the world. His two best hitters were acquired during his predecessor's tenure
Not only was he lucky to inherit EE from JPR and have him breakout in 2012, he was lucky to lose to waivers to the As in Nov 2010 and then have Oakland non-tender him a month later, allowing the Jays to sign him to a below-market FA deal.
AA's history and the 2015 run are remembered quite differently if Oakland could have afforded to keep EE
Well, he was right.
"
This quantity method did lead to some good SP (Syndergaard, Stroman, Sanchez), but these guys were all 1st rounders (though mostly late-to-comp round picks) showing it was still hard to get lucky with lower assets. He also signed Osuna, but he was an expensive, highly ranked IFA. Even lesser successes like Joe Musgrove and Daniel Norris were high picks/expensive signings.
The quantity/pitching heavy focus did lead to other pitchers, but not many above-average diamonds in the rough for less regarded guys (Boyd, Graveman, Desclafani, Castro)"
That's a bit uncharitable.
6yrs of drafting pitching produced this:
SP Syndergaard 14.7war
SP Stroman 13.5
SP Sanchez 9.0
SP Boyd 6.8
SP Desclafani 5.9
SP Graveman 5.4
SP Norris 4.2
SP Musgrove 3.5
SP Borucki 1.3
SP SRF 0.2
RP Osuna 8.0
RP Dyson 5.3
RP Barnes 1.1
RP Mayza 0.9
RP Shafer 0.8
On the hitting side it's really only pillar, hechavarria, vladdy, Jansen...and maybe Tellez.
A certain MVP might disagree.
And AA took a lot of heat for signing those 2 inherited bats to amazing extensions.
2015
Donaldson 8.7war - AA
Bautista 5.2 - JP
Encarnacion 4.5 - JP
Martin 4.3 - AA
Pillar 3.7 - AA
Travis 2.2 - AA
Tulo/Reyes 2.2 - AA
Cola 1.4 - AA
Revere 0.7 - AA
Smoak 0.7 - AA
Valencia 1.3 - AA
Goins 1.3 - JP
Navarro 0.2 - AA
Price 2.6 - AA
Buehrle 2.0 - AA
Estrada 1.9 - AA
Dickey 1.8 - AA
Stroman 0.4 - AA
Hendricks 1.5 - AA
Hutch 1.4 - JP
Osuna 1.3 - AA
Cecil 1.3 - JP
Hawkins 0.3 - AA
Sanchez 0.2 - AA
Loup 0.2 - JP
Lowe 0.1 - AA
That's fine, I know them all pretty well
But I know sometimes I must get out in the light Better leave her behind with the kids
They're all right
.860?
... when he got to .803
#profilesincourage
To the outside observer it looks like this FO is following all the same tactics as the smarter teams - just executing it worse .
When BOS NYY and TB have realised they weren’t genuine contenders they made great trades and got great assets - the Jays have managed to extract very little from a WS caliber roster when the inevitable downswing occurred - that’s pretty bad. Maybe one or two of these come off but easy returns are poor on last years acquisitions.
Ok isn’t really good enough here. And not persuading the powers that be to sell a year earlier looks fairly catastrophic right now.
Further, many of the FA / contract claps have just been bad so far. The Morales contract showed a complete and utter misreading of the market for that type of player - which worries me the most. Add to that the completely unneccesary and restrictive Grichuk deal and you just start to wonder about evaluation and risk / return analysis.
Obviously they get more time but I think it’s right to ask questions given the lack of significant early wins and the scale of the task in Front of us here
Yes, there have been some misreadings of the market but that is true of almost every GM or team at some time. You could say that the Yankees and Twins very much misread the recent deadline market for example. I think the Jays read it correctly in the Stroman deal. Had they waited, the return would have been less as was evident in the Greene deal for example. Teams were totally reluctant to give up prospects of consequence. In fact, the Mets were the only team that did other than the one from SD and Cinci.
Signing Gurriel was good, which offsets
Questionable Grichuk extension, which still doesn't offset
Trading Olivares (future center fielder with seven years of control) for Solarte (negative WAR player)
Etc., etc.
I don't doubt they are nice / sincere people. I just haven't seen much of any evidence that they have the first clue (or luck?) trading from ANY kind of position of strength. Maybe they're good at drafting - I am not qualified to judge that. But it seems like they are very inept at roster management and/or actually assessing talent coming back in trades. It's not that GMs need to be right all the time - and you win some, you lose some. It just seems to me, when it comes to trading, they lose most, quite obviously. And they lose players by not timing transactions well, and then they need more of the type of players they just lost.
And then, when they prattle on about "the will to win" and "this is exactly the player we wanted" when it really feels like they lost the trade badly (again, sigh), then it gets really frustrating.
I wish them well as individuals - I just wish it was somewhere else than in an executive position with the Jays..
These are the moves that people got outraged at this year: Releasing Tulo, letting Bergen and Romero go in Rule V, losing Smith and Ramirez, putting Pompey through waivers instead of giving him a chance. All of these were the right moves or at the very least, didn't matter at all. This is why I end up defending this front office so much. There are so many criticisms that make no sense mixed in with the ones that do.
Sure but also some of this has been manufactured.The narrative of "Cleveland outsiders coming in and destroying what Canadians built" has been pushed since about day 1. Partly because Beeston has a lot of friends in the media. Partly because outrage sells papers. I mean, there are tons of examples but look at this idiocy from Simmons...
"Had Mark Shapiro been in charge of the Blue Jays in the early years, you probably wouldn’t know the names Beeston or Ash. They wouldn’t exist. They would not have been given the opportunity to flourish.
They weren’t cronies from Cleveland. They weren’t old buddies or pals.
They were just hard-working Canadians, rewarded for their success."
Also, I think Stroman should not talk about the Toronto FO while he's in a Mets uniform, unless it's to compare the Mets with the Jays. Sanchez and Biagini are in the best possible place for their career and while Stroman will most likely miss the playoffs, he's now competing on a level field with Syndergaard and Degrom. He needs to focus on that.
The upcoming NYY series should be interesting. The Yankees injuries keep piling and they haven't added any depth.
Part of me would like the Jays to throw the next 3 games in Tampa to make things interesting. The Sogard improved Rays just completed a second sweep.
And this narrative flipping is an interrsting tactic but it sure seems to me the knee-jerk defenders of this FO have more soul searching to do at this point the its critics do.
The comments I read are fairly balanced.
NY media isn't happy about the Yankees standing pats at the deadline.
I'm not exposed to much media from other cities unless the Jays happen to be playing there.
For example, the Baltimore crowd was pretty funny yesterday. Lots of attendance from folks at a "My LIttle Pony" convention, including a huge Australian delegation. You can't make this stuff up.
For the record, I'm not happy about the Sanchez trade.
I think part of it was reducing salaries why trying to make it looks like something else.
Part of it was getting rid of a Boras client.
This year's record doesn't matter. We'll have to wait until next year to see what Sanchez does in Houston, but I thought Stevenson was very interesting.
Overall though, the whole thing is a minor annoyance.
Not having Sanchez just means they have to sign a guy like Happ, Estrada or Jaime Garcia to back up Shoemaker.
Who generally see themselves as saying "wait a minute, it's early days, let's see how it all turns out" as knee-jerk opponents of the front office denounce Atkins, Shapiro, and all their works as soon as they do anything.
Cannon to the left, cannon to the right...
After the trade deadline, how would you rate the front office's overall performance since taking over in 2015?
a) A
b) B
c) C
d) D
e) F
If the Toronto media was completely neutral about the front office, they would still be unpopular, considering:
* their unsentimental jettisoning of popular players
* receiving returns described by the neutral MLB media as puzzling, awful, or at best lukewarm or roughly fair
* a number of moves working out worse in hindsight than was anticipated at the time
* putting the worst team in nearly 40 years on the field in 2019
* also punting at least 2020 and maybe beyond
* the success of AA's clubs since his departure
* zero progress on grass
* zero progress on Rogers Centre renos or game ops - this was supposed to be Shapiro's bailiwick, and all he's done is...shake down the taxpayers of Pinellas County, Florida?
Are all of these problems fair, in the sense of each and every problem being clearly, directly and solely the fault of Atkins and Shapiro? Definitely not, but isn't that true of every unsuccessful job performance? I'm sure Alen Hanson had a hard-hit ball or two right at a defender, but that doesn't mean he should have never been sent down.
These are qualified baseball executives acting in good faith, but "let's all just wait and see" can't be a get out of jail free card. For example, there is no doubt, none whatsoever, that they are perfectly OK with having sub-.300 OBPs in the everyday starting lineup. They just gave Grichuk a lengthy extension to do just that, and they have acquired a number of such out-machine hitters. I just fundamentally disagree with that, and that's reason enough for me to give up on them.
i don't much like it either, but the 2018 Boston Red Sox had three such players in their lineup. And they did OK, as I recollect. And it's hard to see bringing Jose Bautista back in 2017 as anything but a sentimental sop to the fan base.
They wasted too much time. They took too long to tear it all down. It probably should have been done after 2016, it definitely should have been done after 2017.
There's a valuable old piece of baseball wisdom that goes "if you listen to what the people in the stands are saying, you're going to end up sitting with them."
That's why.
- something tells me Devers is a good bet to get on base for the rest of his Boston tenure
- Nunez was a part-timer with an excellent OBP kind-of platoon partner in Holt, and he was a good on-base guy until last year
- their catchers hit like crap last hear, no doubt
- the '18 Red Sox were first in the league in OBP, and the '19 Jays are second-last
I've been looking a little at Jeff Luhnow's work in Houston. The situation is quite different - Luhnow inherited a teardown well underway (they'd just lost 106 games, they'd just traded Hunter Pence) and the rebuild was already in progress (Dallas Keuchel, George Springer, Jose Altuve were already in the system.) Is that where the Jays are at now?
Anyway, Luhnow got rid of everyone making more than $5 million dollars. There was only one really big contract among them (Carlos Lee) and it had only one year left. In the process, he got rid of almost everyone over the age of 30. As you'll recall, J.A. Happ and Brandon Lyon were sent here. We were all happy just to see the last of Francisco Cordero.
They went and lost 107 games in 2012. That must have been painful. And then they lost 111 games in 2013. I would think that was especially painful, because Luhnow had released J.D. Martinez in spring training. He'd just selected Brady Aiken with the first overall pick in the draft, one year after using the first overall pick on Mark Appel, which took a bit of the shine off getting Carlos Correa with the first overall pick. (Because even really good and successful GMs do stuff that just doesn't work.) The first real signs of progress came in 2014, when they only lost 92 games. Woo-hoo, said the folks of Houston, after the sixth consecutive losing season.
I don't expect that to happen here because there is no way anyone is going to stand for losing 324 games in three years. But what we have here is a teardown and a complete rebuild. It may work, it may not - but it's going to take a little time. Let's not be like... oh, Leafs fans?
When you trade assets you usually get back either a flawed upper level prospect or a high risk lower level prospect. You can dream on the lower level kid, you can't dream as easily on the Derek Fishers or Anthony Kay's. More often than not this FO has traded for the flawed upper level prospect. That doesn't give the fans much to dream on.
The FO is probably dreaming on these guys and as Magpie has pointed out, they hope that some percentage of these projects turn into value. But when you don't know which of the long shots will break through you can't focus on any one of them. It's much easier to get excited about Simeon Woods Richardson, even though he could turn out to be as flawed as Kay.
In addition to that trading strategy, another issue is Ross Atkins inability to get anyone excited about players. I believe he acknowledged his communication issues in a recent interview. His delivery is so flat, and so rote, that you tune out. AA and JPR could easily talk up prospects and players and give you hope. Atkins has a tougher time delivering excitement through his words.
There's that, and he was also in the very weird position of having to talk down his most promising young player because he needed to justify keeping him in the minors without telling the truth about it. (Which was the right thing to do, but if he'd told the truth about it, there would have been a union grievance and hell to pay.) So he ends up talking down Vladimir Guerrero and talking up Derek Fisher. Not a good look.
I've been getting the impression, from something somebody wrote somewhere, that the whole point of the trade was not getting Derek Fisher but rather moving Aaron Sanchez. Biagini and Stevenson were required in order to get the Astros to agree to take Sanchez off the Jays' hands.
I don't know if that's true, and I sure as hell hope it isn't. That's just an ass-backwards way to go about making trades, as I've probably said once or twice or thirty times.
M Trout has fantastic numbers. So much better than every current Jay. Ex-Jay E Sogard is putting up very good numbers this year but not as good as M Trout. So I expect the 2 players coming back are quite good.
"Just so that we don't have any misunderstanding about Sogard/Trout. I FIRMLY AM SURE THAT Trout is a MUCH MORE SUPERIOR player than Sogard. CURRENTLY IMO."
Please note the CAPITAL letters and the quotation marks. I am not yelling/shouting. Just trying to be clear and respectful about what I am trying to say because I don't know how to defend the above statement.
Houston went through what Baltimore is going through today.
Where are all those first overall draft picks in the Jays system?
It's only been 7 games for their guy, Bo Bichette, but he's hitting .400 with an OPS of 1.2.
It's too bad Guerrero didn't start like that. Maybe he needed more time in the minors.
Still in the last 30 days, Guerrero has been in 23 games and he's hitting .367 with a .418 OBP..
I find it funny when it comes to people not standing for losing teams in Toronto.
I'd be curious to know what percentage of season ticket holders have bought a ticket with their own money the last time the Leafs won the cup. Me? I was born shortly after that.
Just looking at their birth certificates, I would think it's unlikely either one is going to be a star, although Olivares really seems to have taken a step forward this year (he appears to have learned the strike zone, and not all of them to.) I'm not sold on Stevenson ever becoming a major league regular.
But don't mind me - I always think that the folks out there who actually pay serious attention to prospects tend to fall in love just a little too easily. I'm pretty cynical about every prospect until they actually do something in the majors. Over-compensating, no doubt. I admit it freely!
“Law’s take:
keithlaw
@keithlaw
·
56m
nice pickup for Padres, Olivares was roughly #15 in the Jays' system, power/speed guy who might stick in CF”
...
“The prospect the Padres acquired from the Jays for Upton, Hansel Rodriguez, had a solid 2017 in his age-20 season in A ball (3.21 FIP, 10.3 K/9 IP, 3.1 BB/9 IP). San Diego is no doubt hoping for similar progress from Olivares in 2018. He seems to be a decent return in exchange for another early-30s position player with limited market value (and who may be on the decline).”
...
“Travis Sawchik's take on the Solarte/Olivares trade: "Interesting deal! I like it for the Padres. I don’t think the Blue Jays should be adding, rather, shedding and thinking about building around the Vlad/Bo future core"
https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/travis-sawchik-fangraphs-chat-44/
There are a couple of other articles on the trade on Fangraphs as well.”
...
“Assuming he can hit enough to play in the majors, Olivares could be particularly valuable in spacious Petco. Here are a few comments about him:
From BA's Dec. 20 chat on the Jays' system:
Gerry (Toronto): How much did Edward Olivares stock rise this season? Are there flaws in his game or is he a 5 tool player?
Ben Badler: It definitely went up. Good combination of speed and hard contact from a center fielder with plus speed, plus arm, plus bat speed. It's a high-risk approach because he's not a selective hitter and he's very pull-oriented, so that's probably only going to get tested once he hits the upper levels, but he has some of the best raw tools in the system and the performance he put together with it at least in Low-A was encouraging.
Brett (Stratford, On): With the lower minors filled with high risk players, who are 2 or three names to look out for.
Ben Badler: Noda and Olivares are the two guys outside of the Top 10 to watch there. ...
Per Wayne Cavadi on minorleagueball.com:
Olivares is the real get of the deal. Part of a Lansing team that had superstars Bo Bichette and Vladimir Guerrero, Jr., Olivares big 2017 got somewhat buried.
Olivares was signed out of Venezuela before the 2014 season. He played his first three years in Rookie ball, showing signs of life, but never exhibiting top notch stuff. Turning 21 entering his first year at full-season ball, Olivares exploded in Low and High-A.
He slashed .277/.330/.500 in Lansing before a late season promotion to the Florida State League. The right-handed slugger has a quick bat, but is mostly pull power, launching 15 of his 17 home runs to left field. He has well-above average speed, and combined with that power, he was able to add in 26 doubles and nine triples. Olivares was good on the base paths, swiping 18 of 25 stolen base attempts.
Obviously, Olivares isn’t a perfect prospect. Again, using only his time in the Midwest League, he only struck out 17.7 percent of the time, but he also only walked 4.7 percent of the time. Those numbers were more balanced in the FSL, but he also only played 19 games at the level. His Lansing numbers are more indicative of his previous time in Rookie ball. He also could possibly add some more power if he can bring his ground ball rate (44.2 percent) down a bit. He makes his fly balls count with a 12.9 percent home run to fly ball ratio.
Watch this home run. You can see how wiry he is, which makes his power more impressive (and shows there is likely more coming should he continue to progress as he did this year). He has a little noise pre-swing, but when he sees his pitch, he unloads quickly and powerfully (video courtesy of Blue Jays Prospects on YouTube).
Olivares also excels defensively. His speed gives him the range and he has the arm to play all three outfield positions. That gives him the floor of a fourth outfielder and the ceiling of an everyday centerfielder.
Still just 21, Olivares looks like he has room to grow. He’s 6-foot-2 and 185 pounds, so a reduced ground ball rate and some added muscle, the Padres are looking at a future 20/20 player who makes pretty good contact. This is a great get for the Padres, and one the Blue Jays were able to make thanks to some depth at the position.”
Here's an idea: if the point of the trade was to get rid of Sanchez, why don't you simply not tender him a contract in the offseason? If the point of the trade was to get rid of Sanchez and Fisher was more of a body in return, than a player the front office desired, why not simply ride out Sanchez for two more months, see if you see any positive signs, and non-tender him if you don't?
I know it's small potatoes compared to the Stroman and Sanchez deal, but the Phelps deal puzzles me. Atlanta got a better return for two months of Chris Martin than Toronto did for a year and two months of David Phelps, with a $1 million salary no less.
Toronto got 1 40 FV prospect for Phelps. San Francisco got 2 40 FV prospects and a 35 FV prospect for a year and two months of Sam Dyson (as best as I can tell he's a FA after 2020). And Dyson, who is arbitration eligible and earning $5 million this year, will likely be paid $6 or $7 million next year.
I have a hard time believing Toronto couldn't have gotten a similar return from a budget-conscious team like Minnesota that was clearly looking to upgrade it's pen. Alternatively, maybe Toronto could have packaged Phelps with Stroman and gone hard after a top return from Minnesota, who has stated publicly they wished Atkins had come back to them and given them a chance to beat New York's offer (and I'm inclined to believe this comment is genuine and not some form of ass-covering, given that it's about one player and it's not something I've heard Minnesota's front office say before).
As others have said, it seems like this front office zeroes in on their guy, and become determined to acquire that player rather than looking for alternate offers (SWR with New York, at least once it became clear the Yankees wouldn't trade Deivi Garcia; it seems like Hatch with Chicago, etc..).
You mean Texas, right?
Oh come on. You make them sound like the Rays or Marlins. Cost is a factor for all teams - it just carries different weighting depending on the team and their position in a win cycle. At this point they've got to be paying more for players to not play for them than their current roster (I'm pretty sure this is not factual, merely an exaggerated statement for emphasis). Do you disagree with their moves? Hell, I do with some. Are you frustrated they're losing? Sure. Are they treating payroll different than any other team? No. If anything, they're probably near the top of the dead-money lists.
I say that even though I don't really know why he was sent down. My guess was to give Smoak & Sogard full time playing time so that they could be traded.
As for Tulo, Magpie, I'm pretty sure that became set in stone the moment they released him, retirement or no.
It's 60M worth.
https://www.spotrac.com/mlb/toronto-blue-jays/payroll/
Which would indeed be more than the active payroll, but the Jays aren't paying the whole $60 million, surely? They wouldn't be paying the entire salary of everyone they traded away.
Trading prospects for an ace starter is not a fire sale. The Expos were trying to do exactly the same thing as what Anthopoulos did with the trade for David Price.
Early in the 2013 season, I posting something like "I thought defensive indifference was a a late stage baseball play rather than a team building strategy."
They made their move earlier in 1989, trading three pitching prospects (one of whom was extraordinarily tall and extraordinarily ugly) for Mark Langston at the end of May. At the time they sat in 4th place with a 23-23 record. Langston pitched very well for them (12-9, 2.39) but the team went 48-48 after the trade, finished fourth, and Langston signed with the Angels in the off-season.
Sometimes history just rhymes, doesn't it..
Offensive mistakes are not chargeable.
the recent trades look the same in principle - i'm not sure how highly rated any of them were at the time - but, i'm not sure the industry as a whole hasn't become better at evaluating talent in the last 20 years.
To which I reply: "Thou has been forgiven. Arise Sir Knight." I chose incoherent, inaccurate, historical misquoting indifference.
Which on reflection, is my second favorite form of indifference. My favorite form of indifference is simply - not to reply.
But - once I'd started to type - it seemed too late to choose it. You know, without (in a manner of speaking) cheating. Sigh.
at the same time, though, you would think that some if not most organizations are combining comprehensive positioning tracking and the exit velo/angle/hangtime data into a pretty good defensive metric
In the original moneyball days, OBP was the undervalued asset, so if you were smart you'd acquire that.
With the less sure values if you think you know something others don't about positioning, or reaction, or launch angles, or spin rates, or attitude and willingness to win, or what not you might think you could get an undervalued resource by acquiring that type of resource.
If you are right, you could end up with a terrificly strong team that you acquired and signed for less than market rates.
If you are wrong in your unique view of value, you may end up with a team of clones that you've "winner's curse" to acquire that you think are bargains but actually aren't.
This may have happened with the Jays and may be why a certain type of player seems over represented. Or it could just be a coincidence.
Just looking at his last 3 games, 1 single, 1 double, 0 walk, 5 strike outs for an OPS of .556.
I believe the plan was to send him down until they traded Smoak--who was notified they were trying to move him--but all 4 interested teams ended up doing something else, probably because his OPS for the year is only .757.
It's better for fans to grow their own stars and they've had a decent run in the end, although not quite good enough.
Speaking of runs, the Cubs window is closing slowly, after only 1 WS. Their bullpen has not been good this year and Maddon just said that fans talk about "bullpen management" without any knowledge of what factors into each decision and then criticize any move that has a bad outcome.
Cleveland will be in the conversation as long as they have Lindor--another 3 years--and then it's probably tear down time.
Boston shouldn't make the playoff this year. It's going to be interesting to see how they retool. The have nothing in the farm. The payroll is maxed. Brock Holt and Porcello are free agents, Bogaerts has an 8M raise coming up. Betts has one last year of arbitration. So does Bradley.