Cliff Johnson.

I seem to recall a game last year or perhaps two seasons ago where the Jays had Trevor Richards throw nothing but changeups.

As in, he came into the game and threw 15 or so changeups in a row on purpose.

And I don't believe it was because Richards was particularly dominant or the hitters were helpless.

I recall the broadcast crew being fairly incredulous.

It's not so much anything specific to Vlad for me personally. It's more of a general disdain for max salary very long-term contracts to begin with. Even with Vlad being young at present.

I value year-to-year flexibility in payroll rather than locking in a good player like Vlad for a decade at top-of-the-market rates.

Particularly with the competitive window closed and no clear plan to return to competitiveness apparent in the near future. I don't wish to commit a significant chunk of a future GM's resources for years simply because of emotions and FOMO today.

That being said, you also can't just lose Vlad and Bo for 4th round comp picks like they did with Donaldson & Merriweather.

So that means you should dump Vlad and Bo for the best you can get now or next winter, keep resources flexible and figure out the plan from there.

The Astros, Cubs and Orioles are the only teams that successfully rebuilt.

Their future looks bright, yes, but until it's sustained or they win the hunk of metal, I don't think you can call it successful.

This. I don't think this front office has signed a single player with under 3 years of major league service time to anything but yearly contracts. We can debate the wisdom of various players in retrospect, but I find it very odd that not a single player has signed.

The Jays traded a Top 5 prospect in baseball for Varsho, so obviously they really believe in him, but there was no attempt to lock him up. Jansen's been a great hitter when healthy the last 3 seasons (prior to 2024), but there's been no attempt to lock him up. No attempt to sign Manoah. And so on.

While some of these deals may backfire, these deals have the potential to give you the biggest cost/benefit reward and the ones that backfire often don't backfire too badly, as the amount is absorbable and many players may have already established a baseline of performance that results in decent paydays in their latter years of team control. Plus, many of these deals result in additional years of team control, often in the form of team options (which is of course another benefit to the team).

I was going to mention the Grichuk extension because it doesn't get discussed much.

The front office gave him a 5-year deal a year after acquiring him and when he had at least two years of control left.

I recall that people were puzzles with the extension and length from the get-go.

Grichuk was coming out of his age-26 season with an OPS+ that year of 117 due to 26 HRs but red flags with an OBP of 300 and multiple seasons with similar on-base below that.

The extension seemed to be banking on that Grichuk, similar to their hope for Varsho, would continue to develop into the 3 WAR+ player with an OBP above .320 that he's showed glimpses of several years earlier in St. Louis.

But the deal turned out to be a bad one from the day it was signed as Grichuk regressed instead of improved, being a well-paid second-division starter the whole time.

I'm totally open to the idea that the Orioles have rebuilt successfully — I bet it feels great to be a fan in Baltimiore right now! — but then I think you have to include a lot more teams in those ranks, including Atlanta, the Phillies, Seattle, and yes, the Jays.

• Jays: 21-20-13-11-7-6 = $907,649,635, 3 playoff appearance
• O's: 27-29-27-30-29-26 = $358,618,564 1 playoff appearance