ugh, Bruce Chen sucks!

He gave up more runs :(

The reason Bush wasn't optioned with the rest of the prospects to AAA is that he was never officially with the big league camp roster. They will have to add him to the 40-man pretty soon though...

Ricciardi is quoted a few times in the Philadelphia Inquirer's story on the numbers game.

The Newark Star-Ledger floats around a rumour that involves the Beane-Depodesta-Ricciardi trifecta.

The Mets are interested in trading for Werth, according to the New York Post.

And looking through his crystal ball, Jim Callis (Baseball America) predicts the Jays to win the division in 2007:

The Yankees and Red Sox still boast the two largest payrolls in the game. But what the Blue Jays lack in financial resources they make up for in young talent, winning the American League East with a lineup and rotation that's purely homegrown with the exception of Eric Hinske.

Double-play partners Russ Adams and Aaron Hill set the table for a lineup powered by outfielders Alexis Rios and Vernon Wells and DH Carlos Delgado. The rotation is equally strong, headlined by Roy Halladay, Dustin McGowan and Francisco Rosario.

That should give us some more to talk about!

Nice job with those articles Steve. I'm apparently asleep at the wheel.

The Newark Star-Ledger floats around a rumour that involves the Beane-Depodesta-Ricciardi trifecta.

Apparently the Jays are giving up players for nothing.

Given the LA-Tor rumours, it is interesting to note that Greg Miller's shoulder injury is not as serious as first thought and he will be pitching again in 4-6 weeks.

Given the lack of names involved in the rumors to the Mets and Dodgers, who would the Jays be interested from those teams (that those teams would give up)?

I was thinking G Mota would be nice to have from the Dodgers, although I'm not certain where he is in his service time.

I like Odalis Perez, but he likely makes a few million, and would warrant more than Werth in a trade.

I'm not sure who the Mets would be willing to trade that the Jays would want.

http://economics.about.com
I was thinking G Mota would be nice to have from the Dodgers

Yeah, one of the five or six best relievers in baseball would be nice to have. Particularly since he only makes $1.5 million a year. I think he'd cost a heck of a lot more than Jayson Werth. :)

I'm not sure if this was Mota's first or second year of arbitration.

Cheers,

Mike

The name that comes to mind with the Mets is Aaron Heilman. Ricciardi has had his eye on him since he skyrocketed out of college, and he's probably undervalued right now (see: Arnold, Jason) because of a disappointing 2003. He's battling it out for the 5th spot in the Mets rotation. The spring numbers look good.

You can listen to today's game (Doc vs. Detroit B team).

Yeah, one of the five or six best relievers in baseball would be nice to have. Particularly since he only makes $1.5 million a year. I think he'd cost a heck of a lot more than Jayson Werth. :)

I could have said Gagne.....

http://economics.about.com
I could have said Gagne.....

Heheheheh. Why not throw in Howie Clark and get them both? :)

I know this might get me branded a heretic, but I'd rather have Mota than Gagne. I don't think there's over 3 million dollars difference between the two.

Of course, if Gagne brings in a lot more fans because he's a Canuck, then that's a different story.

Cheers,

Mike

you guys mean to tell me that Rios for Cora, Roberts and Izturis wouldn't satisfy you? ;)

If Montreal wasn't such a messed up organization, trading for Gagne might, by itself, make it a viable market again. If he keeps being the dominant closer in baseball, he'd become a Montreal folk hero. People would come to the games just to see him, a homegrown boy who made good in a sport other than hockey, and imagine all the promotional opportunities.

At this point i would be very hesitant in involving rios in any trade unless we are getting something equally great back in return. Not only is cora, roberts, and izturis for rios unsatisfying but it is also Ludicrous.

Braden the only way rios is going to the dodgers is if we get something like a jackson or a gagne back in return.

Can anyone give an update on the game? How did Halladay do?

Count me among the people who'd still like to see Werth get a season (like 350 ABs, taking some away from Johnson and a few from Cat) to see what he could do in the bigs. His value probably isn't that high right now, given how he performed at AAA the last couple of years. If we could get decent return for him that would be one thing, but if we are trading him just to avoid losing him for free, let's avoid that. I'd rather have him as our 4th outfielder than Hermanson. Heilman would be a nice pickup, but I don't see him being flipped from an unproven Werth.

Mike, what should get you branded as a heretic is attending that PC/Alliance convention.

Jays won 2-1. Halladay pitched an outstanding 6 innings, giving up just two hits, allowing one run, with 0 BB, 5 K, a balk, and only allowing two balls out of the infield. He left with the Tigers up 1-0, but the Jays would take the lead with some clutch hitting in the 7th, culminating in a two-out single by Kevin Cash. De los Santos, Adams, and Speier each pitched scoreless innings to nail down the game before the two-hour mark.

Wilner is working the post-game show and is taking calls soon...

http://economics.about.com
Mike, what should get you branded as a heretic is attending that PC/Alliance convention.

LOL. Trust me, they thought I was a heretic too. If dirty looks could kill then I would have been murdered by Elsie Wayne yesterday. :)

I guess Conservatives are supposed to look a certain way, and this isn't it:



I really hope that the Conservatives can shake off their extreme social conservative stereotype, but after this weekend, I'm not incredibly optimistic about it.

Cheers,

Mike

Why not throw in Howie Clark and get them both?

Genius! Although the Dodgers would have to throw in money to make the deal work. Can't go over budget!

http://economics.about.com
Genius! Although the Dodgers would have to throw in money to make the deal work. Can't go over budget!

Oh yeah, the Dodgers would have to pay both of their salaries. To make it up to them, we could throw in Dave Berg. But that's only if they covered every last penny. We wouldn't want to get fleeced now.

Cheers,

Mike

Whiz,

I totally agree. I was only kidding, hence the ;) at the end of my comment.

Surprise, surprise! Chen was reassigned to minor league camp today. Fordin's latest notes are here, and Lilly's first spring outing is drawing near...

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/21/sports/baseball/21QUAN.html?pagewanted=print&position=
A large article in today's NY Times (COMN) about Paul Quantrill (or more correctly, an article about his arm), "Quantrill the Indefatigable: He Only Seems Bionic". You may need to register (free) to read it.

The thrust of the article is captured in the 2nd paragraph: " If Quantrill were a Dr. Seuss character, he would throw in a box; he would throw with a fox. He would throw here or there; he would throw anywhere. Quantrill wants to throw, needs to throw, and no matter how much he does, his arm never hurts."

Quantrill speculates that the reason is arm doesn't get hurt is that it doesn't have enough muscle. According to the story, he's one of 2 relievers in history to pitch in at least 80 games a season for 3 consecutive years.

Quantrill started throwing "for hours straight" as a kid. In high school, he'd often catch the first game of a doubleheader (so he could throw after every pitch), and then pitch the second.

He tells his manager now that unless he says otherwise, they should assume he's ready. He figure his arm could handle 110-120 games a year -- his legs and back couldn't.

what's the deal with the ugly new Jays logo?

If Adam Dunn is really available and J.P. is willing to give up Rios, then why involve LA in a 3 way trade?

Why not offer the Reds, Rios for Dunn straight up.

Dunn is only a year older than Rios. In 2+ years in the majors he has hit .241/.379/.484, and at 24 looks ready to break out in a big way. Rios is very talented, but may be slightly overrated right now considering his relatively low walk and power totals.

If I'm not mistaken the Reds are looking for pitching in return for Dunn.

But otherwise, that really is interesting to consider.

http://economics.about.com
I like your thinking Dunn vs. Rios, but I think it'd be a pretty bad deal for the Jays. If the trade was made today, you'd get one very cheap year out of Dunn, and three arbitration eligible years. If you keep Rios, you get three insanely cheap years and three more arb. eligible years. While Dunn may be the better player, is 4 years of Dunn worth more than 6 of Rios? Particularly when Rios will be pre-arb for 3 of those years, and Dunn for only one?

Cheers,

Mike

Good point about Dunn only having one more year before arbitration.
I was only thinking about their respective talents.

what's the deal with the ugly new Jays logo?

The deal is, that's the new logo.

It's not universally popular, but of the four logos the Jays have had, I like it better than the second one and a lot better than the third one. In time I may like it better than the first; we'll see.

Logo? Who couldn't live with that? Them colors though, Blahk! I don't know what makes it worse having to watch NY Mets highlights? the rotten ballclubs or those black uni-tops? Putrid. It's like watching a Raiders game.

http://www.lyleblog.com
I don't know why the Jays don't ever hook up with the Mariners in a deal. The Mariners are loaded with Young arms and no position players and the Jays have lots of outfielders, and not many Arms and you can never have too many arms.

I really hope that the Conservatives can shake off their extreme social conservative stereotype

Good luck with that.

The latest Rosenthal column has the Jays, along with the A's and Red Sox, interested in Kirk Saarloos of the Astros.

Saarloos is the typical underrated pitching prospect with a fastball in the mid 80s, but he mostly relies on his curve and change to keep hitters guessing. Sickels has called his slider and changeup "excellent."

While Kirk's big league numbers aren't terrible impressive he put a 3.08 ERA (2.67 ERC) in AAA in 2003 and a 2.25 (2.69 ERA) in AAA in 2002. He has fairly good control in the minors, walking a batter and a half every 9 innings, and his strikeout numbers aren't terrible impressive, although he did strike out a batter an inning over 80 innings at AA Round Rock in 2002.

I'm not sure what we'd want to give up for Saarloos, or what Houston would be looking for, but he's very likely someone who is undervalued in some camps.

extreme social conservative stereotype
Is it a stereotype if it's true?

No politics, kids.

Let's focus on Moffat's pink hair instead!

http://economics.about.com
Is it a stereotype if it's true?

That statement sounds like profiling. I thought that was verboten with the left. :)

Well, it's true for many, many Conservatives. But like any large group of people, you're going to get a diverse set of viewpoints on various issues. The challenge for the Conservatives is to make sure Red Tories don't defect to the Liberals (like far too many have) and centerist people fed up with the Libs don't just stay home on election day. Given what I saw this weekend, I'm not very optimistic.

Let's focus on Moffat's pink hair instead!

Good idea. :)

The latest Rosenthal column has the Jays, along with the A's and Red Sox, interested in Kirk Saarloos of the Astros

What, the Dodgers aren't interested too?

http://www.foxsports.com/content/view?contentId=2252078
COMN for the Rosenthal column. It's like Gammons without musical references.

Hey Mike, was that Ralph Klein speech as painful to listen to live as it came across on TV?

(What at the convention makes you think that the Red Tories are going to be left behind? Anything that the media hasn't already covered?)

Jason, political junkie

...I'd rather have Mota than Gagne. I don't think there's over 3 million dollars difference between the two.

You're right. You could have Mota AND Cormier for what the Dodgers are paying for Gagne.

I'm actually surprised the Yankees didn't try to take Livan Hernandez over Javier Vazquez. Given what they'll both make in 2004, I don't think there's over 5 million dollar difference between their 2003 performances.

http://economics.about.com
Hey Mike, was that Ralph Klein speech as painful to listen to live as it came across on TV?

Yeah, pretty much. In fairness to Klein, it was painfully obvious that he was told to kill time. They needed him up there as long as possible, because it was taking them longer than they had hoped to count the ballots. So he was talking very slowly and deliberately and kept going off on tangents.

The only funny part is when he said that business people should stick to being business people. The Stronach supporters were less than impressed. :)

What at the convention makes you think that the Red Tories are going to be left behind? Anything that the media hasn't already covered?

The media has pretty much gotten it right. There was a really obvious division between the Stronach supporters and the Harper supporters. You could tell all the Harper rank-and-file were made up of old time Reformers. I talked to a bunch of them, and they said the worst thing about the new party is that "Mulroney's in it".

Stronach's supporters were more out of the old Brian Mulroney/Joe Clark/Bill Davis Tory mold. Other than a bunch of undergrad-aged people, there weren't a whole lot of older Stronach supporters at the convention. The ones that were there looked very uncomfortable. They're (like me) part of the pro-choice, pro-same-sex-marriage wing of the party, and a lot of them told me flat out that they're afraid to vote for their own party. They believe that if the Conservatives get a majority, they'll push through all these extreme social changes that mainstream Canada isn't interested in. I won't be voting for my local Conservative candidate in the next federal election for this very reason. I'll either vote NDP or stay home.

The funniest thing about the whole convention: The one person everybody spoke very highly of was... Jack Layton! The Conservative were raving about how finally the NDP has someone who can motivate the center-left and steal votes from the Liberals. About two dozen times I heard him described as "Our Nader". Other than Clement, Layton was the only person nobody had a bad thing to say about.

Cheers,

Mike

Mike, I like your thoughts on politics.

Personally, I don't like any of the three parties, and I am seriously considering voting for the Green party to show my disgust. Even though I don't agree with everythign they say, at least they have a plan for everything, and they'll tell you what it is. They don't spend their time talking about economics pies, fighting with themselves, or figuring out what suit to wear for the photo op.

Well, hopefully Harper's election will drive away the socially-liberal, fiscally-conservative people like Mr. Moffatt and the NDP will be able to reap the rewards.

Thomas, you may be right.
Personally, I can't stand Jack Layton, and will never vote for a party that has him as leader. Obviously many people feel differently. So I'm left with the Liberals, or an independent/green party. If you're fiscally conservative, do you trust the NDP?

NDP - balance of power - baby!

Moffatt, good on you for participating in the democratic process.

What scares me most is not the rise of intolerance, but the apathy that allows that intolerance to take root.

http://economics.about.com
If you're fiscally conservative, do you trust the NDP?

Not as far as I can spit. Fortunately there's zero chance they'll get more than a few dozen seats, so I'm not too worried. If Layton had an economic plan, I'm sure I'd be against it. If he does, though, he's keeping it to himself.

Cheers,

Mike

I like Jack quite a bit as a person and a municipal politician. Luckly I've had the opportunity to do some work with him on the local level and I really have nothing but praise for him on that front. Federally, however, he leaves alot to be desired. Though my reasons are probably different from your reasons in many respects (I see him as too much of a centerist, especially after the call made to Sheila Copps) but where we'll all probably agree is that he relies too much on platitudes and not enough on platform. I've heard him speak literally dozens of times and it is so rare the message will ever change that I could probably write you a copy of his next "speech" before he delivers it. Part of the problem is he doesn't actually read speeches, they're generally off the top of his head and although very engaging, they tend to lack substance (this is most noteable when he talks to bodies like the business community). He is a very bright man who I know has all the substance to do a very capable job leading an official opposition next time 'round but he'll need to prove to the country at large this substance exists. Otherwise, he's exponentially more engaging compared to the likes of Paul Martin or Stephen Harper (I've had the chance to meet Martin but not Harper in person so I'm going on TV feeds to read Harper).

I'm not surprised in the least that Tories are trying to build up Layton for the reason stated above: they want a split Liberal/NDP vote. And talking to people in NDP circles, they were gunning for a Stronach win so the Liberals/Tories would split votes (especially in the GTA) to allow a few more NDP candidates through.

As it happens, the weekend turned out like everyone expected and no one except for Harper and the Liberals are happy...The Liberals will pick up about 180 seats next election and cruise to a majority because no one trusts either the NDP or Conservatives for a plethora of reasons (why should they? Neither represents a compentant gov't in waiting) and we've had the status quo for 11 years, what's a few more? (Clearly not how I see it but that seems to be how public opinion works).

The Conservatives are a very viable governmentt in waiting. Look at what they would be replacing, current Fiberals included.

http://economics.about.com
I'm not surprised in the least that Tories are trying to build up Layton for the reason stated above: they want a split Liberal/NDP vote.

Completely. I'd be surprised if Harper spent much time attacking Layton. I doubt Harper will even acknowledge that Layton exists.

The funny thing is, they were saying all this stuff off the record as well. They seem genuinely pleased to have someone with a lot more charisma than the past two NDP leaders.

Cheers,

Mike

current Fiberals included.
Ugh, the Toronto Sun at its best.

Look at the size of the government, look at the size of the official opposition. Then look at how many Conservatives have actually been in government during their political careers. The numbers on both fronts aren't promising if you like the Cons or hate the Grits. If a Conservative government were to be elected, there would be so many green MPs taking office, nothing would be done over the first year of their mandate in the best case scenario and in the worst case we'd have a full term marred by rookie mistakes resulting in the public service making virtually all the decisions and subsequently taking democracy even further than it already is from the people.

http://economics.about.com
If a Conservative government were to be elected, there would be so many green MPs taking office, nothing would be done over the first year of their mandate in the best case scenario and in the worst case we'd have a full term marred by rookie mistakes resulting in the public service making virtually all the decisions and subsequently taking democracy even further than it already is from the people.

a.k.a. The Bob Rae effect. ;)

Cheers,

Mike

I'd be surprised if Harper spent much time attacking Layton
This was why the Ontario NDP got party status without question under Harris but had a horrible time getting anything when McGuinty was elected.

a.k.a. The Bob Rae effect.
Exactly! (I think I meant to throw those exact words into that post)

http://www.electionprediction.org/2004_fed/index.html
Well said guys, I think anyone that is expecting anything different in the next election is in for a big disappointment; there is just too much working against the other parties for a significant change to take place. If I was a Liberal, there would only be one man to be afraid of, and luckily, Mr. Harris decided against it.

Especially with one of the most small-c conservative Liberal leaders taking the helm, I think that if anything Harper's inviting of the Reds into the party was a desparation apology, intended to hopefully bring back a lot of the people that like the Conservative ideals, but aren't in the righter-wing mold of the Reformers-in-disguise, especially when the man currently in charge will look out more for their needs (albeit under the red Liberal banner).

I'm surprised about the Layton love though. I've never met the man, but he comes off as a good speaker, intelligent, well-articulated and good with people; the only thing holding him down is his party, he's kind of 'the big fish in a little pond', but only time will tell I guess :)

Looking into my official crystal-ball ($24.99, Wal-Mart), I predict a majority of 172 seats for the Liberals, with gains being split 2:1 between the Conservatives and the N.D.P. The Bloc will remain fiesty and stable, the Green party environmentally friendly and the Hemp Party will forget the day to vote on, a la The Simpsons.

On a side note, there is an elections prediction page that uses calculations and numbers and charts and other things out of the realm of my arts degree to deduce some fairly accurate (high 80-90% most of the time) results (COMN)

Being from Brooks, Alta I find this thread hilarious. You guys are tripping over each other to say that Harper can't be trusted, but this crew in power is OK. I had an Alliance membership and am pro-choice, don't have a real opinion on gay marriage, I think they should have the benefits of marriage, and there are lots of Conservatives in bad Alberta just like me. Chretien would not put the gay marriage issue to a referendum and why not? If the only people against it were in The West it would have passed in a land slide. Fiberal is a great term for them, Chretien writes up a major transaction on a napkin, pepper spray at APEC, the HRDC scandal, gun registery over runs, eliminating the GST, wripping up the free-trade agreement and now Adscam. How many have I missed? Harper and his "green MPs" look very good compared to this "veteran" lot we have had for the past 11 years. By the way, Go Jays Go.

Being from Brooks, Alta I find this thread hilarious. You guys are tripping over each other to say that Harper can't be trusted, but this crew in power is OK.

Harper's devotion to this country is as thin as a five-dollar bill. I don't understand why nobody ever mentions the very serious opinion piece he wrote in 1998 advocating that Alberta separate from Canada. (This is not to mention the various Alberta separatist groups he's linked to). Or does being from Brooks, AB mean you don't give a shit about the rest of the country, just so long as Alberta gets what it wants?

If Bernard Landry or Lucien Bouchard is such a bad guy because he wants to break up the country, why doesn't Harper get the same treatment? Harper is impossible for me to take seriously.

Or does being from Brooks, AB mean you don't give a shit about the rest of the country
I'm hardly one to censor but that takes the civil nature out of this discussion and, in my mind, has no place here. I disagree with Dean whole-heartedly but at least play fair.

Well anyway, I agree with Dean. Go Jays Go.

Well Craig B, before you stomp all over Alberta, go back and read that essay again and then read over your 1st paragraph again. Your attitude is why the Reform party started, and the fact that the PCs had Bouchard and friends. By the way who is the former Bloc founder now running for the Liberals? Laperier???
Yes Alberta has it's oil but the rest of Canada has also benefitted from it as well, unlike Quebec we have contributed billions more than we have received from the Federal government. Harper's essay was about that, we send the money but don't ask us how to spend it. Yeah we do give a shit, thats our problem, we want some accountability from those in Ottawa. Chretien said before the last election that he would rather deal with those from Eastern Canada. That said a lot to Albertans. And Go Jays Go. And this will be my last post on the subject because I'm a baseball fan & thats why I come to this site.

I lied, I'm posting again, A & Craig B's posts were posted while I was writing my long winded blah, blah, blah

Oh no. Another dreaded political BB thread. :) Is this worse than John Wasdin or what?

http://`
Okay, since alot of people don't like these threads, I'm wondering if anyoen knows of a good place for discussion of Canadian politics?

Even better if it's filled with people that are civil.