Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
Calling Kelvim Escobar's departure "all but a foregone conclusion for months," Spencer Fordin looks at the decision to let him go in a fine column on the Official Site.

From the beginning of the season, the Blue Jays braced against losing the talented right-hander. They tried to move him before the trade deadline, but they weren't able to find an acceptable offer. Now, the return is twofold -- the Jays net two draft picks from Anaheim and can also use the money earmarked for Escobar to apply to other areas of need.

With no axe to grind, and without inventing some silly concept like "returning wins," Fordin, who is pretty hard to brainwash, sees all J.P.'s offseason moves in context.

Escobar's 180 innings are more than offset by the twin acquisitions of Lilly and Hentgen, provided that they stay healthy. In fact, Hentgen had the best ERA of that trio, and Lilly's was comparable to Escobar's. Neither of the additions have Escobar's upside, but that's not really the point: Collectively, they'll cost a great deal less than the brand-new Angel on his own.

I agree 100% with his conclusion. Like them or not, the budget restrictions are reality, so it's a good thing to have saved the money. If it's used to land another decent starter, a bullpen upgrade and some shortstop help, the team will be significantly improved.

Better Without Escobar? | 32 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
_Jabonoso - Thursday, November 27 2003 @ 02:43 PM EST (#84930) #
We definitely would be better with Escobar.
You can also see Lilly and Hengten as Lidle and ( absent ) replacements i.e. third and fourth starters.
We do need a front of the rotation starter, and that is expensive...
forecast a bright future for Kelvim, he is now in a much better environment that he used to be in order to flourish.
_sweat - Thursday, November 27 2003 @ 03:04 PM EST (#84931) #
Escobar would need to go to a magical place, where ego + promise = results on the mound. I would have loved for escobar to be back for next year, but anything over 5M was overpaying by a long shot. Hentgen will be making 2.2M and Lilly made .3M last year, and i think i saw he was due for a raise in the 2M dollar area. These 2 pitchers replacing escobar and Lidle doesn't hurt this jays team at all.
Post all star game:
Escobar: 3.89 ERA with an 8-3 record.
Lidle: 5.35 ERA, and going 2-7
Lilly: 7-3 with a 3.45 ERA. not to mention 9 playoff innings with a 0.00 ERA
Hentgen: 6-3 with a 3.10 ERA
I think the Jays should get another starter, but i also think the most pressing need is one very good reliever.
_Geoff - Thursday, November 27 2003 @ 04:07 PM EST (#84932) #
Our relievers are given a bad name because of the overall state of our bullpen last year...in the last three years our group of five (Politte, A-Lo, Kershner, T-Miller, Walker) has faced 1101 right handed batters who managed a .662 OPS and 993 left handed batters who managed a .769 OPS...those are decent numbers and also lead me to believe that our need in the bullpen is a Rincon type

(those are major-league stats only)
_R Billie - Thursday, November 27 2003 @ 04:16 PM EST (#84933) #
If they can't get a true #2 starter then I would see if I could get two guys like John Thomson and Cory Lidle signed for about $4.5 million collectively. That gives you four decent but not dominant arms behind Halladay, relegating Hendrickson and Towers to injury insurance.

Then I'd go after two relievers, probably one guy who would sign for about $2 million (Beck, Worrell?) and one guy who would come for about $1 million (Ligtenberg, Sullivan). The collective rotation and bullpen additions would take a lot of pressure off of Lopez, Politte, and Miller who made way too many appearances last year.

The $500K or so which is left can go towards shortstop insurance. Shave a couple hundred thousand off any of the above expenditures if you need to spend more on shortstop insurance but I think the Jays will end up going quite cheap here. It's Woodward's job for better or worse.
Mike Green - Thursday, November 27 2003 @ 05:21 PM EST (#84934) #
As it stands today, the rotation would likely be:
Halladay, Hentgen, Lilly, Hendrickson, Towers. The relief staff would likely be: Lopez, Politte, Kershner, Walker and Miller. Contributions from Arnold, Bush, Chen and/or McGowan could be reasonably be expected later in the year. Who knows what Justin Miller's status will be.

In my view, one starter is all that is required, with Hendrickson and Towers fighting for the last rotation spot and the loser in the bullpen. If Batista will sign on for 2 years at $5 million per or 3 years at $4 million per, I'd do it. If he's going to get Escobar-like numbers, then the Jays will have to live with John Thomson, who might be a tad better in Toronto than he was in Texas.

The one plus in 2004 is that the Jay schedule, unlike 2003, is not murderous at the beginning. The toughest patch is a long homestand in late August-September when they face the Yankees, the Red Sox, the As and the Mariners. Fortunately due to days off, Roy Halladay could conceivably pitch 4 times in that stretch. As well, one of the Syracuse boys should be ready by then.
_lightbulb - Thursday, November 27 2003 @ 05:24 PM EST (#84935) #
I think the jays' bullpen, although not great, is already better than it was last year at this time. Creek, Tam, Politte, Escobar, and others were all duds in the pen, and Walker was out for much of the year. They eventually lost playing time to several effective pitchers: Kershner, Lopez, Miller. Walker will be back in swingman/long-relief mode.

I would love to see JP sign one or two strong but not overpriced relievers. The Jays aren't far enough along in their long-term plan to start splurging on name-brand relievers.

And come up with one good arm for the rotation (far better than two mediocre, 5.00 ERA guys).
_R Billie - Thursday, November 27 2003 @ 06:11 PM EST (#84936) #
I'm not sure that one $5 million arm is better than two mediocore starters because for the Jays there's a strong possibility that they may have to deal with injuries. Lilly and Hentgen have not been the picture of health and I'd rather have two #4 guys behind them so that they can still have innings in volume.

Of course I'd like to pursue Batista but with him demanding a three year pact and with the Yankees and Mets in the hunt for him, it's not looking good for the Jays to land him. They weren't willing to go 3 years and $15 million on an offer to Escobar and I don't see them going in that neighbourhood for Batista. I'm figuring they'd have to bid close to 3 years, $12 million to have a chance with Batista.
_QuestionGuy - Thursday, November 27 2003 @ 07:59 PM EST (#84937) #
Suppose we place delgado on waivers and he gets claimed ... can he excercise some sort of no trade option -- what are his options ?

I was thinking about either trading delgado for prospects (or getting rid of his salary), and then using the money to go after an elite ss and/or pitcher since phelps could play 1B. My thinking is that even if tejada came at $12 Million, we not only cover a position of weakness, but also get an extra $6 Million to sign an elite pitcher and make a run at a title this year, with decent flexibility in the year to come.
_R Billie - Thursday, November 27 2003 @ 08:08 PM EST (#84938) #
Not a bad thought but Tejada will require a first round pick to sign and I don't think the Jays ever want to give up their first rounder. And there's no guarantee at all that Tejada would come to Toronto even if they were willing to offer $12 million for five years (which I don't think they would).
Pepper Moffatt - Thursday, November 27 2003 @ 08:26 PM EST (#84939) #
http://economics.about.com
Nobody would claim Delgado if he was placed on waivers. I highly doubt J.P. would even consider it.

Delgado isn't going to waive his no-trade, so that isn't an option, either.

So the point is rather academic.

Mike
Joe - Thursday, November 27 2003 @ 08:48 PM EST (#84940) #
http://me.woot.net
Not only is nobody going to claim Delgado if he's put on waivers but J.P. isn't going to try to get rid of him because he's too big a part of this team.

The point has been made before and will be made again that his production is unlikely to be replaced at any near point in the future; perhaps not any far point either. Phelps may be a good hitter, and he may develop into a great one, but I can't imagine the day when he's as good as Delgado. (Not only that, but who will you get to play 1B? Delgado is pretty good defensively, and the replacements are entirely inadequate (Cat) or will be a step back (Phelps).)
_bird droppings - Thursday, November 27 2003 @ 09:44 PM EST (#84941) #
Would you rather have Tejada or Delgado?

Personally, I'd rather one of the top five players in baseball today in Delgado. Delgado will resign, and he'll resign on the cheap. The man has sense, and sense would tell me if I was him that I've made my big bucks when the Jays could afford it. Now, its time to free up some cash for them and get myself a few World Series rings. I was also born and bred in the Jays system and love the city of Toronto, so why wouldn't I sign. It's not like I'm in the city a lot anyways.

(Of course, you all realize that I am just praying that the above is all true.)
_bird droppings - Thursday, November 27 2003 @ 09:45 PM EST (#84942) #
Would you rather have Tejada or Delgado?

Personally, I'd rather one of the top five players in baseball today in Delgado. Delgado will resign, and he'll resign on the cheap. The man has sense, and sense would tell me if I was him that I've made my big bucks when the Jays could afford it. Now, its time to free up some cash for them and get myself a few World Series rings. I was also born and bred in the Jays system and love the city of Toronto, so why wouldn't I sign. It's not like I'm in the city a lot anyways.

(Of course, you all realize that I am just praying that the above is all true.)
_QuestionGuy - Thursday, November 27 2003 @ 09:55 PM EST (#84943) #
You guys do not understand the equation:

phelps + tejada + (pitcher with $10 mil (6 freed up + 4 available)) > delgado.

For me this is a no brainer. Think about this, you take woodward and delgado out of the lineup and replace them with phelps and tejada and we are at least as good as we were last year in terms of offence. DHs are cheap, and we can always platoon myers and cat out there.

Moreover, the defence would be much better, and woodward sucked last year.

I also think that delgado would be claimed. There are some teams out there looking for a 1B, and he is a one year contract.
_Jordan - Thursday, November 27 2003 @ 10:04 PM EST (#84944) #
I'm coming to believe that the rotation's not going to get tremendously stronger this off-season. All the potential #2 starters who would be better than Lilly but not as good as Halladay are still pretty damn impressive (e.g., Millwood, Ponson, Pettitte, even Batista) and apparently will cost serious money and probably a draft pick, and that's not in the cards for Toronto. There's always the chance of a trade for a Ben Sheets or someone like that, but I have a feeling the Brewers are asking the moon for Sheets, and similar trades could be equally expensive. Good, cheap pitching is extremely hard to obtain.

On the whole, I think I'd be okay with acquiring one more decent starter (John Thomson, or a reasonable facsimile at $2.5M), throwing the #5 spot open to the kids, and driving the rest of the FA money (circa $5-6M?) into that bullpen. As stated elsewhere, the building blocks of a reliable pen (Lopez, Kershner, Miller, possibly Politte) are already there. The likes of Foulke, Guardado, Urbina and even Beck are established names and consequently out of range, but they do have the salutary effect of flooding the reliever market. If the Jays could snag one of Hawkins, Gordon or Worrell, and maybe trade for another (there was talk of Juan Rincon during the season, IIRC), then you're doing pretty darn good. It would be terrific to have that strong supporting guy in the #2 spot, especially since we all remember last season: calling Cory Lidle a #2 guy didn't make him one. But one ace, three decent starters and a solid bullpen will get you some distance towards 90 wins in this league.

As for the Delgado-Tejada thing, here's a few points to consider:

- Putting Delgado on waivers would not only suck the wind out of this young team's morale, it would be taken as an umistakeable signal by Roy Halladay that this team is not serious about winning, and you can kiss his long-term contract goodbye.

- Miguel Tejada is going to get richer offers from bigger markets than Toronto, and he's going to take one of them. If he wanted to play in front of small crowds for less than his fair value, he'd be staying in Oakland.

- Imagine putting Delgado on waivers and he goes unclaimed. Imagine Delgado's attitude from Day One of spring training.

Accept it, folks: Carlos Delgado will be a Blue Jay throughout 2004. Don't be in such a hurry to get rid of him: the time will be here soon enough when he's wearing another uniform, and we'll have forgotten all about his salary while remembering only his homers, doubles and smiles.
Pepper Moffatt - Thursday, November 27 2003 @ 10:05 PM EST (#84945) #
http://economics.about.com
phelps + tejada + (pitcher with $10 mil (6 freed up + 4 available)) > delgado.

Who would DH?

And if Tejada + Pitcher is better than Delgado, why would any team claim Delgado when they could just sign Tejada + Pitcher instead?

I also think that delgado would be claimed.

By what team? I don't see any teams with an extra 20 mil lying around wanting to sign a 1B.

Mike
_Nathan - Thursday, November 27 2003 @ 10:09 PM EST (#84946) #
nobody would claim delgado at that price and nobody would trade for him either unless the jays ate 70 per of his contract which in turn would not allow the jays to sign a SS anywhere near the caliber of player as tejada ... something also to consider : delgado could have easily been the ALMVP this year -- why be so eager to get rid of that bat? he made that offense work last year ...
_QuestionGuy - Thursday, November 27 2003 @ 10:25 PM EST (#84947) #
Who would DH?

We could use a platoon until gross and rios get called up, or sign some cheap guy.

And if Tejada + Pitcher is better than Delgado, why would any team claim Delgado when they could just sign Tejada + Pitcher instead?

Tejada is a multi-year contract and you also lose draft picks. Moreover, some teams have a particular need for power hitting 1B like the dodgers, atlanta, orioles, and all of the aforementioned teams have lots of money (at least according to espn). Lastly, with delgado there are 2 draft picks coming to you at the end of next year if he leaves and you get him for free without giving up any prospects.

In my opinion he is the one guy we could do without. He tends to get injured, his numbers suffer, and we have a good replacement for him in phelps. Given that the jays use money as an excuse to why they can't sign pitchers (a REAL need), I just can imagine them giving so much mulah to a guy that's great to have but in the bigger picture is just superfluous.
_Jordan - Thursday, November 27 2003 @ 10:42 PM EST (#84948) #
He tends to get injured

Games Played, Carlos Delgado:

1999: 152
2000: 162
2001: 162
2002: 143
2003: 162

his numbers suffer

OPS (OPS +), Carlos Delgado:

1999: 948 (137)
2000: 1134 (182)
2001: 948 (141)
2002: 955 (153)
2003: 1019 (160)

I'm not sure who you're talking about, but he doesn't play first base for Toronto.
Leigh - Thursday, November 27 2003 @ 11:22 PM EST (#84949) #
[Delgado is] just superfluous

That's not true. Losing Delgado would exacerbate our need for pitching. Consider this:

Last year, the Jays played 1435 innings, and Delgado played in 1403 of those, 1278 at firstbase.

Let's suppose that Delgado is not there, what do we have to replace? 1278 innings at firstbase and 125 innings at DH.

The first base innings: last season, Phelps was the backup firstbaseman, but he also played 1006 innings himself. So 1435 (Jays innings) - 1006 = 429 available innings for which Phelps can cover for a missing Delgado.

That leaves us with 974 Delgado innings to cover. The next backup first baseman is Tom Wilson. Wilson played 605 innings, so that leaves him available for 830. With 778 remaining Delgado firstbase innings, Wilson can cover them all.

So, we now have the firstbaseman innings covered: 429 for Phelps and 778 for Wilson.

Next, we have to deal with Delgado's 125 DH innings. Naturally, you would assume that Phelps would take over here, but he has no remaining available innings, because he has been designated above as dedicating his remaining innings to covering firstbase. That is, Phelps' playing time for every inning of every game has already been allotted.

So, to cover the DH innings, we will use Greg Myers (who is next in line, in terms of DH innings in 2002). Greg played 781 innings, leaving him available for 654 more. With only 125 DH innings to be distributed, Myers is available to cover them all.

To recap:
Delgado's First Base Innings (1278)
Phelps - 429
Wilson - 778

Delgado's DH Innings (125)
Myers - 125

Remember, you cannot just replace him with Phelps, because Phelps was already getting innings himself. You can only replace Delgado with Phelps to the extent that Phelps has some available innings (he has 429 of them). So then, what do we have to replace Delgado? You can see from above that we have a FrankenJay creature who is composed of 55% Tom Wilson, 36% Josh Phelps and 9% Greg Myers.

And how would this FrankenJay perform, in order to compensate for the loss of the suddenly "superflous" Delgado? Well, remembering that the FrankenJay percentages are based on the allottment of innings, Delgado's 705 plate appearances would be distributed thusly: Wilson - 388, Phelps - 254, Myers - 63.

Using Tom Wilson's numbers over the past three seasons, we see that he gets .111 runs created per plate appearances. So, in his 388 plate appearances that he would get in place of Delgado, he would create 43 runs. Phelps gets .153 RC/PA, which means that he would parlay his 254 plate appearances in 39 runs created. Myers gets (based on the last three seasons) .141 RC/PA, meaning that his 63 plate appearances will yield 9 runs.

So:
Tom Wilson - 46 runs created
Josh Phelps - 40 runs created
Greg Myers - 9 runs created
FrankenJay Total - 95 runs created in 705 PA's (replacing Delgado)

Carlos Delgado in 705 PA's in 2002: 139 runs created.

So: the difference between Delgado and FrankenJay is 44 runs over the course of a season.

The Jays run differential with Delgado was 894-826
With FrankenJay (no Delgado): 850-826

Pythagorean W-L in 2002 with Delgado: 87-75
Pythagorean W-L with FrankenJay: 83-79.
They actually won 88, not 87. So, Delgado is worth 5 wins over FrankenJay, and that is if you only consider offensive value. Delgado is an above-average firstbaseman, defensively, and the others are not.

I like to call this Contextualized Replacement Value.

My point, that losing Delgado would exacerbate the need for pitching, in that the Jays pitchers would have to prevent an extra 44 runs just to break even for the loss of Delgado (this is not exactly true as there are issues surrounding the value of a "marginal" run scored relative to a run prevented once you reach a certain level, but that difference is negligable when we are talking about 44 runs).

This has not been proofread, and was written in a mad frenzy.
Leigh - Friday, November 28 2003 @ 12:30 AM EST (#84950) #
There are a couple of typographical mistakes above. To clarify: Wilson gets 849 of Carlos' 1278 firstbase innings. This alters slightly the composition of FrankenJay, although only by a %point or two, so the analysis is not really effected.
_Young - Friday, November 28 2003 @ 12:38 AM EST (#84951) #
http://nextbaseball.blogspot.com/
I think the above postings replying QuestionGuy is sufficient. I'd like to add that Tejada just isn't that great of a player. He won the MVP in 2002, but I think most Bauxites will agree that he didn't deserve it. And last year he was didn't improve on 2002 either.

Another problem with the whole signing Tejada thing is this, JP has positioned the Jays into some nice payroll flexibility for today and the future. Why go ruin in and sign Tejada, who will definitely command a 4 year contract (at least) for who knows, 10 million to start? I understand some people see Delgaldo's salary for the upcoming year and immediately see "evil", at least that is how I think the media portrays it.

If you think teams have lots of money, go to website linked to my name, over at Wait 'Til Next Year, the author has looked at potential salary room and you'd be surprised how little money teams have to sign free agents. Unlike 2 years ago, the Dodgers, Braves and possibly even the Yankees (gasp!) are cutting payroll.

This is IMO, but if someone had the payroll flexibility, Ramirez would have already been claimed.
_Geoff - Friday, November 28 2003 @ 12:41 AM EST (#84952) #
Excellent work Leigh - one point of clarification - the Jays won 86 games, not 88
Leigh - Friday, November 28 2003 @ 12:58 AM EST (#84953) #
Thanks, and yeah, 86
_S.K. - Friday, November 28 2003 @ 01:23 AM EST (#84954) #
I agree, an excellent job by Leigh articulating the "Delgado isn't chopped liver" argument.

...tune in next week for our "Cliff Politte isn't tomato soup" and "Tom Wilson isn't pastrami on rye" installments.
robertdudek - Friday, November 28 2003 @ 09:28 AM EST (#84955) #
Again with this trading of Delgado .... sigh.
Craig B - Friday, November 28 2003 @ 09:37 AM EST (#84956) #
I agree, an excellent job by Leigh articulating the "Delgado isn't chopped liver" argument... tune in next week for our "Cliff Politte isn't tomato soup" and "Tom Wilson isn't pastrami on rye" installments.

Are we building a ballclub, or running a deli? I'll have a turkey on dark rye with hot mustard and tomato, a side of Catalanotto, two pickles, and a Coke.
_Cristian - Friday, November 28 2003 @ 01:56 PM EST (#84957) #
"Tom Wilson isn't pastrami on rye"

No kidding. I'd take a pastrami on rye any day.
_Matthew Elmslie - Friday, November 28 2003 @ 02:28 PM EST (#84958) #
I don't understand how people can believe that the way for the Jays to improve is to get rid of their best player. Do they think that they're being sophisticated by 'looking beyond the obvious' or something? Sometimes the obvious - in this case, that Delgado's enormously valuable - is true.
Coach - Friday, November 28 2003 @ 02:33 PM EST (#84959) #
Echoing Robert's sigh here. It's way too soon to worry about next winter. Nobody knows what the market may be next year, how the 2004 Jays will do on the field, or what Carlos is thinking. He's going nowhere, but I enjoyed your mad frenzy, Leigh, and your conclusion makes sense.

JP has positioned the Jays into some nice payroll flexibility for today and the future

Exactly. And he's done it around Delgado's contract, which hasn't been easy. That flexibility could prove valuable at the trade deadline, or next offseason.
Dave Till - Friday, November 28 2003 @ 04:16 PM EST (#84960) #
For me, it's simple: teams win championships by acquiring players who are among the best in the league, not by dumping them.

Carlos Delgado was just voted the second-best player in the American League, and he may very well be the best pure hitter. He's a career Jay, he's hardworking, he's durable, he's in good shape, he's articulate and personable, and he likes it here. He may even be willing to take a hometown discount after 2004, provided the Jays are serious about winning. The Jays don't really have a replacement (if you move Phelps to 1B, there's nobody to DH). And, as Jordan says, if you waive Delgado, you also say bye-bye to Halladay.

Why, exactly, would anyone want this guy to leave?
Mike Green - Friday, November 28 2003 @ 05:27 PM EST (#84961) #
If Carlos Delgado leaves at the end of 2004, it will only be with great regret on the part of the organization that finances did not permit him to be kept. I truly hope that he is a lifetime Jay.

On a different note, it occurs to me that if JP is unable to sign Batista or to acquire a pitcher of similar quality in a trade, the Jays may wish to consider a modified 4 day rotation. In Lilly and Hendrickson, they have 2 lefthanded starters without much seniority who have trouble going beyond 6 innings; in my view, they would be ideally suited to a tandem pairing. A rotation of Halladay, Lilly/Walker (or equivalent), Hentgen and Hendrickson/Towers has appeal to me. There would be some issues to resolve:
a. you probably would need a spot starter for long stretches without a day off, so that Hentgen wouldn't have to go on 3 days rest more than once in a row.
b. how will Hentgen perform on 3 days rest period?

But, the plusses seem considerable:
a. the tandem pairings can go eight or nine innings consistently without too much wear on the bullpen,
b. the incentive for Walker/Towers would be the 3 or 4 inning save
c. if you need to go to the bullpen after either of the tandem starters, the opposition will have faced both a lefthander and righthander for several innings and so some of the options available to the opposition in the late innings might be exhausted,
d. you get a couple of extra starts for Roy Halladay

I'd prefer that Batista is signed, but if the next pitcher to be signed will be a 4.50-5.00 ERA type, I'd certainly consider this option.
Better Without Escobar? | 32 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.