Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
In a town where too many baseball columnists find it easier to bash the GM than to understand what he's accomplished, it's refreshing to read an unbiased article. Larry Millson of the Globe and Mail calls the Jays "a team experiencing growing pains as they try to regain contending status" in a balanced review of a .500 club. Says J.P., who knows the market better than most:

"We're never going to get pitching unless we develop and draft our own. That's the biggest void in our organization."

He's right, as usual. The previous regime would have thrown three year deals at Omar Daal and Ismael Valdes, perpetuating the mediocrity. Ricciardi acquired one-year rentals with no strings attached, which he will do again this winter. Perhaps the stopgaps will work out better than Lidle, Sturtze, Creek and Tam; if so, the illusion of contending could last even longer in '04, but it's still a transition year. Two great drafts have created a deep talent pool of minor-league arms, though it will be 2005 before any of them has a real impact on a big-league pennant race. By then, the system will be self-replenishing; in the meantime, fans have to be patient.
Progress, Not Perfection | 16 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Pistol - Friday, August 08 2003 @ 08:54 AM EDT (#95265) #
It sounds like the Jays have at least $10 million to spend on pitching this offseason. However, I wonder if the Jays would be better off by not using their entire budget at the beginning of the season, but rather save $5 million or so to pick up players that teams are dumping in July.
Dave Till - Friday, August 08 2003 @ 09:40 AM EDT (#95266) #
If they have money to spend on pitching, they may need to spend it all to keep Halladay (which they should).
_Rob C - Friday, August 08 2003 @ 11:43 AM EDT (#95267) #
Millson mentions the Jays' 25-30 home record at the end of his column, and are there any theories why this is the case? Especially when the Jays have the fifth or sixth best road record in the majors. I know the Skydome is a hitter's park, but why would our pitchers have more trouble than visiting teams' pitchers?

Aside from having sinkholes like Sturtze in your bullpen, of course.
_Viktor Haag - Friday, August 08 2003 @ 01:37 PM EDT (#95268) #
If they have money to spend on ptiching, they may need to spend it all to keep Halladay (which they should).

Based on Kelvim's performance as a starter, Halladay/Escobar is looking like a pretty decent one-two punch, money permitting. Halladay is a rock solid performer, and Escobar just has that touch of "throw this one at the mascot" in him that's often useful as a number two guy.
_Viktor Haag - Friday, August 08 2003 @ 01:40 PM EDT (#95269) #
Rob C. asks why the Jays have a losing record at home

Perhaps it's because they play on turf which makes a speedy nimble defensive infield that much more a factor?
_Shrike - Friday, August 08 2003 @ 01:57 PM EDT (#95270) #
Personally, I feel that Escobar has the talent to be a #2 starter behind Halladay (well, to be honest he has the stuff to be an ace), but if I were the Jays I'd prefer to budget for a more reliable #2 and slot Escobar at #3. I realize this will not happen as the Jays' management philosophy is to avoid significant expenditures on proven starting pitching (I'm particularly thinking of how far the Jays could go in the next two years if they signed Millwood to a FA deal), but it's nice to dream.
_Jurgen - Friday, August 08 2003 @ 03:08 PM EDT (#95271) #
I'd also like to see Millwood as a Blue Jay, and a rotation of Halladay, Millwood, and Super-Kelvim would make me happy. But, honestly, the bidding on Millwood between New York and Boston (not to mention Atlanta, SF, St. Louis, and all the other contenders who need pitching) will likely price him way out of our range.
Pistol - Friday, August 08 2003 @ 03:59 PM EDT (#95272) #
Here's a question: What's the likelihood that one of Arnold, Bush, or McGowan pulls a Brandon Webb or Dontrell Willis for the Jays next year?

I would think it's slim, but I wouldn't have thought Willis or Webb would be this good right now last year at this time.
_Matthew Elmslie - Friday, August 08 2003 @ 04:07 PM EDT (#95273) #
Here's a question: What's the likelihood that one of Arnold, Bush, or McGowan pulls a Brandon Webb or Dontrell Willis for the Jays next year?

I'd be surprised if the Jays gave anyone the opportunity to be such a thing. I think 'slow and steady' is the idea around here, at least when it comes to bringing young pitchers to the majors.
_John Neary - Friday, August 08 2003 @ 04:36 PM EDT (#95274) #
Here's a question: What's the likelihood that one of Arnold, Bush, or McGowan pulls a Brandon Webb or Dontrell Willis for the Jays next year?

Based on what we've seen this year, if one of them does it, it probably won't be Arnold.

Barring a big signing, my hope for next year is Doc/Escobar/Thurman/Bush/McGowan, ill-advised as that may be.

Millson mentions the Jays' 25-30 home record at the end of his column, and are there any theories why this is the case?

Well, a .500 team (which the Jays are, so far) will win 25 times or fewer in 55 games 29.5% of the time. So I don't think any theory is required to explain this state of affairs.

The above should not be taken to imply that the difference between the Jays' home and road records is necessarily due to chance alone, merely that it might very plausibly be due to chance alone.
_Chuck Van Den C - Friday, August 08 2003 @ 04:45 PM EDT (#95275) #
Here's a question: What's the likelihood that one of Arnold, Bush, or McGowan pulls a Brandon Webb or Dontrell Willis for the Jays next year?

What's the likelihood that Brandon Webb or Dontrell Willis will pull a Brandon Webb or Dontrell Willis next year?
_Eric C - Friday, August 08 2003 @ 05:08 PM EDT (#95276) #
How many top pitching prospects actually have a large impact in their rookie season? Jerome Williams is doing fine in San Francisco, Kurt Ainsworth was pitching well until his injury, and Dontrelle Willis has been amazing. But on the other hand Jesse Foppert has stunk it up.

What are the chances that say McGowan puts up a 3.50 ERA or under when he arrives next year or in 2005?
_Jonny German - Friday, August 08 2003 @ 05:27 PM EDT (#95277) #
John, I'm curious about why you would leapfrog McGowan & Bush over Arnold. I can see pegging them as having higher ceilings, but do you also feel they're closer to being ready for the majors? I do agree that I'd rather lose with green potential than with recycled mediocrity.
Pistol - Friday, August 08 2003 @ 05:51 PM EDT (#95278) #
Webb, 2002, age 23, AA El Paso:
152 Innings, 122 Ks, 59 BB, 4 HR, 3.14 ERA

Willis, 2002, age 20, A Kane County/Jupiter:
157 Innings, 128 Ks, 24 BB, 5 HR, 1.81 ERA
_John Neary - Saturday, August 09 2003 @ 01:50 PM EDT (#95279) #
Jonny: I'd say that Arnold has a better chance than Bush or McGowan of being able to put up a sub-5.00 ERA next April. However, I'd also say that Bush and McGowan have better (if small) chances to put up a sub-3.50 ERA, which is a major part of "going Willis or Webb on the league." Does that clarify my earlier, somewhat opaque statement?

I will freely admit that these assessments are based on a modest dose of statistics, a small dose of second-hand reports, and a great deal of guesswork.
_Jonny German - Saturday, August 09 2003 @ 10:12 PM EDT (#95280) #
Yup, that makes sense in a less than sensible way... Arnold is older and has experience a higher level of competition, therefore is more likely to keep his head above water, but McGowan & Bush haven't struggled at any level yet so therefore might not struggle even in the majors. Works for me. Of course, the smallest chance is that the Jays would actually open 2004 with those two in the rotation.

I do wonder if the Jays would be wise to go the route of easing them into the majors by sending them to the bullpen initially. I guess the biggest argument against this approach is that you start their service clocks without getting as much return as you would if they were successful as starters.
Progress, Not Perfection | 16 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.