Maybe a bullpen arm or two for the expendable (for Tampa) Edwin Jackson? He's arbitration eligible and is probably their 6th or 7th best starter depending on how you look at it (behind Shields, Kazmir, Garza, Sonnanstine, Price). He's still very young with good stuff.

TB's bullpen success this year was certainly out of the blue. Balfour and Howell were both minor miracles given their track records. Percival was lights out at the start but eventually (and predictably) broke down. Wheeler, who's had an up-and-down career, was terrific. 

But moving forward, this is clearly not a group that can be relied on without hesitation and a situation the brass will surely address in the off-season. I agree with Mike that their m/o will probably not be via $10M-a-year pitchers.

My guess is that he likes Toronto, but feels that he's matured enough under Arnsberg to go his own way--presumably to the highest bidder on his short list of teams (and somewhere not too far from Baltimore, his hometown).

It's funny how off-season speculation on the destination of free agents factors in the quality of the teams pursuing a given player, the proximity of those teams to the player's home town, and other such factors. And then Team X offers the highest dollar total and that's where the player goes.

Of course, the determination criteria is entirely the player's prerogative, and if it's bucks, well, that's entirely his business. I think that we fans tend to underestimate the ego-stroking effect of the highest bottom line offer and overestimate all the other factors. (No need to cite the exceptions. I know they exist.)

Bang on Chuck. If you or anybody else is searching for a job, you look at proximity to home, work atmosphere, work/play balance and consider all of those things. But, if a company comes along and offers you considerably more money, even though its office is further away, it's a stressful job and you'll spend more time commuting, all of a sudden you start to find justifications for why those negative points "aren't so bad after all".  It almost always comes down to money.

If the money is very close, then the other factors become much bigger players. But the money drives the decision more then anything else I think.

A Bit off topic, but has anyone checked out Doc's Wikipedia page lately?  Just cruising today and found out that Roy's been traded for Ichiro and Bedard....talk about an under-reported trade.....

I'm not sure I entirely agree with that article. Yes - the Rays have done a very good job of signing good players (Pena, Floyd, Iwamura, Miller) and some fantastic late round draft discoveries (Shields particularly, Sonnanstine, Perez),and then a whole bunch of players acquired through trade. Kazmir was a stealing of course. And the article states "Garza and Bartlett" were acquired via trade.

The article also states that "Of the 25 men on the Rays ALCS roster, exactly 4 were selected with the team's first round picks", which is really manipulative because there is no way the Rays get Garza and Bartlett if they didn't have Demlon Young to dangle.

In my mind, that makes the players on the Rays roster that are the result of 1st round draft picks this:

Longoria (pretty HUGE role for the team this year)
BJ Upton (a CF who stole 44 bases and had a .383 OBP... pretty huge role for the team)
Matt Garza (arguably the 2nd most important starter on the team this year when you combine total innings thrown with the quality of those innings)
Jason Bartlett (solidified the infield D)
and then Rocco Baldelli and David Price who admittedly played very small roles (although one could easily argue that Price's 1.1 innings were so incredibly important that his success in that situation inflates his 'this year' value).

So, what are we left with? Considerably above average 3B, CF, SP, and averageish SS. I think the Rays 1st round picks have played a very important role in the success of this team. But nothing is isolated in a vaccum! This is what irritates me about these analysis'. These excellent 1st round picks wouldn't mean squat if the team didn't surround them properly. And vice versa. All the factors have to work together or you won't be successful. Unless, of course, you have a 200,000,000 payroll.

Perhaps Beeston can use his connections within MLB to start some meaningful discussion about changing baseball's  playoff qualification format. 

Working towards and achieving a balanced regular season schedule and AL wide playoff seeding format would be a superb parting contribution from a man, Beeston, who has already done so much for the Jays. 

What could be more fair?

What would motivate owners to want to change the schedule structure or divisional alignments or playoff structure?

A balanced schedule means more road games in off-time zones, when your TV viewers are less inclined to watch. And while teams like Toronto and TB may well relish their improved chances of earning playoff revenues with an altered schedule or divisional alignment, I'm sure their owners don't mind the (presumed) higher home attendance when Boston and New York come to visit.

If there is a financial incentive to change things, then I think you can get the owners' attention. If it's just about fairness, that may not be enough.

I have a hard time believing that a team that got 460 innings and 38 wins out of Halladay and Burnett and had by far the best pitching in baseball overall suffered from bad luck. Other than Wells, what injury to the offense was unforseen and crippling? Please don't say Aaron Hill, because Inglett was a more than serviceable replacement (vs. RHP especially). Any injury to the bullpen (Accardo/Janssen) was more than off-set by replacements (Carlson/League).

The Jays problem? The offense stunk and was without a legit 30 HR hitter. They traded/let go superior players for inferior players (Glaus/Johnson vs. Rolen/Stewart-Wilks). That's it. No bad luck, just bad decision making and a lack of offense.

After so many years, the fact that this many are still pointing to run differential to justify another .500+ season is remarkable to me. At one point do you notice its flaws and realize it means very little in the grand scheme of wins and losses?

I think the Mo Vaughn comp has long, and rightfully, been hanging over David Ortiz's head like the Sword of Damocles. Vaughn's last great year was at age 30. Could Ortiz's last great year be at age 31 (i.e., last year)? Red Sox fans did not have to endure Vaughn's decline thanks to some Bavasi mad money. They will almost certainly be on hand to watch Ortiz's demise.

Of the comps Mike listed, I'd say Vaughn's body type is far closer to Ortiz's than any of McCovey, Bagwell, McGriff and Delgado, four players who aged a whole let better. A fifth comp, Hrbek, was a big fellow as well, maybe not quite as doughy as Ortiz but doughier than the other four comps. While he was more athletic than Ortiz, still able to play the field in his 30's, he started fading away at age 32.

An OPS+ in the 125-range from Ortiz would certainly not hurt the team, but his days of top-5 MVP finishes (something he accomplished in a five-year run from ages 27 to 31) are seemingly a thing of the past. His is a body type that just doesn't age well.

Just kinda browsing the bios of both the Phils' & Rays' players and one thing kinda caught my eye.  Cole Hamels was drafted in 2002 and only became a "strong" starter last season (his 2nd).  Which has me rethinking my labeling Ricky Romero as a "failure".

If Romero can debut sometime next season in the Jays' rotation and make say 12-20 starts, half of them quality.  Then he's on pace with where Hamels was 4 years after his draft.  Plus Hamels was a later draft pick than Romero.  Now I'm not saying Romero is going to become/or is expected to become Hamels, but it puts his progression in a better perspective.  Heck, if Ricky can become Hamels lite for the Jays then we won't be whining about Troy what's his name anymore ;).

Cole Hamels was one of the better pitchers in the league as a 22 year old rookie. (and more than a k/inning as well) Romero had a 1.59 WHIP in AA as a 23 year old. It's not in the same ballpark.

I agree they're not in the same stratosphere, but my point was that I'm a little more optimistic now, to think that if Romero gets his feet wet next year and becomes a serviceable #3 guy in 2010, then he wasn't a bust as many of us currently see him as.

I agree they're not in the same stratosphere, but my point was that I'm a little more optimistic now, to think that if Romero gets his feet wet next year and becomes a serviceable #3 guy in 2010, then he wasn't a bust as many of us currently see him as.

I don't pretend to follow the minor league players all that closely so I'm just looking at the numbers here. I'm curious about what you see that projects Romero as a potential mid-rotation starter. His K rate has vaccillated between good and not good and his BB rate has been consistently poor.

Has he overcome injuries? Has he developed new pitches? Do the numbers belie his true ability? (These are not rhetorical questions. I really don't know.)

As for the Hamels Lite comment, I don't see that at all. Apart from them both being lefthanded, their profiles are not especially similar. Hamels has shown immaculate control over his 500 MLB innings, from ages 22 to 24, while Romero has walked a batter every other inning over the past two years, at ages 22 and 23, facing AA and AAA hitters.

"Next year the Rays will drop"

I agree with your points about luck John, but I have to disagree with your statement about the Rays.  I see a top three franchise over the next five years, with this being year one.  This is a team that has arrived, with numerous young talents exploding at the same time - Garza, Young (assuming this injury-free playoffs is the real version), Longoria, Navarro.  Baldelli looks to be back (great news too - who wasn't pulling for the guy, with all his bad luck?).

Talented mid-career vets Crawford and Pena actually slipped somewhat this year and can be expected to rebound.  Kazmir and Shields are studs, and there are numerous good supporting players who are in their prime or aren't old enough to be likely to implode - Bartlett, Iwamarua, Aybar, Gross, Zobrist, Hinske (why isn't he playing?).  Balfour, Wheeler, Sonnastine, Jackson and hammels are in the same boat off the mound.  Throw in Price and this team looks scary good to me. 

Plus, they have a super cheap payroll, an emerging fan base and more young talent in the minors. 

Run differential aside, and I doubt that will last next year, what's not to like? 

Tough division indeed.

Young (assuming this injury-free playoffs is the real version)

I assume you mean Upton. Apparently he is slated for shoulder surgery once the playoffs are done.

Talented mid-career vets Crawford and Pena actually slipped somewhat this year

Crawford is only 26, a little young for the mid-career label. As for Pena, 30, I imagine that 2008 is closer to his actual ability than 2007. I would bet on a 2009 OPS closer to 900 than 1000.

Hinske (why isn't he playing?). 

He was left off the ALCS playoff roster. Given how shakey Gross has looked, both on offense and defense, and given how Trevor Miller was so little used (that said, he could find a role facing Utley/Howard as an early 2-man LOOGY), perhaps Hinske will be on the WS roster. Has anyone heard if the rosters have been set yet?

As an aside, did anyone else find it odd that Gross was brought in as a defensive replacement for Baldelli in game 7? Baldelli was once a center fielder, and a good one. Have his health concerns so dramatically affected his defense?

Run differential aside, and I doubt that will last next year, what's not to like? 

As John and others have pointed out, teams that prominently lunge forward tend to recede a little in the subsequent year. Perhaps not one of Newton's laws of motion, but an apparent baseball truism. There's a hell of a lot to like in TB, but some hiccups may be in order.

The Jays went 4-16 (!!!) in one-run or extra-inning games against the Rays, Red Sox and Yankees.  I guess it's up to you whether you believe the Pistol argument, the John Northey argument, or somewhere in between as an explanation.  The scores:

vs. TB:  7-4 (13 inn.), 1-0; 4-5, 3-8 (13 inn.), 1-2, 2-3, 0-1, 2-3

vs. BOS: No one-run or extra-inning wins; 0-1, 1-2, 5-6 (11 inn.), 3-4, 3-4

vs. NYY:  2-1, 7-6; 2-3, 2-3, 8-9, 1-2, 2-6 (10 inn.)

Chuck, every other team in the AL would love to have the Yanks/Red Sox visit their stadiums a few more times.

The teams that would lose regular season revenue (Jays/D-Rays/Orioles) won't mind given the increased likelihood of playoff related revenue.

As for more out of time zone games I can see that being a potentially significant issue for the AL West clubs but how many extra out of zone games would there be over the course of a full season? 

As for tradition, for years the best regular season team in the AL would play the best regular season team in the NL in the world series. 

To maintain the integrity of the 162 game regular season MLB needs to have a schedule that ensures the best clubs qualify for the post-season.

It certainly won't happen unless well-positioned insiders get the ball rolling in the right direction. 

As for tradition, for years the best regular season team in the AL would play the best regular season team in the NL in the world series. 

To maintain the integrity of the 162 game regular season MLB needs to have a schedule that ensures the best clubs qualify for the post-season.

I agree. But what you and I may want has no bearing on anything.

Owners want to make money. If that means more playoff teams, so be it. If that means that wild card teams with 83 wins win the World Series, so be it. If that means that needless off-days are introduced to a playoff schedule, so be it. If that means that a blind eye is turned to steroid use during a post-labour outage period where the fans are finally returning, so be it. If that means that the bases are emblazoned with cartoon spider webs as a means of promoting an upcoming Spider-Man movie, so be it.

Okay. So not that last one. "Integrity" won the day there. But it was only the feared backlash that caused the owners to walk away from the modest handful of krugerands that such blatant commercialism would have earned them. Cartoon webs on the bases. It almost happened.

The owners are more than happy to honour the integrity and history of the game... as long as there is money in it for them.

If that means that needless off-days are introduced to a playoff schedule, so be it.

I don't agree with you on that one, Chuck.  I think it's far better for baseball that every postseason game has a time slot to itself.  Does anybody remember the ill-fated "Baseball Network" coverage of the 1995 playoffs?  Every game -- division series and LCS -- ran simultaneously with regionalized coverage.  If you lived in Seattle's market that year, you wouldn't have seen one pitch of the NL playoffs.  And following a ballgame on the internet was rudimentary at best.

Keep the current scheduling style.

Sure, but it is just one factor, and in the Rays' case a small one. 

I hear you Mike. My instinct is to believe the 2009 Rays will be even better, for all the reasons you cited. But in all sports, not just baseball, there just seems to always be a subsequent year recession. I can't intelligently articulate why I think a stronger roster will produce 92 wins, say, rather than 97 again or even 100. My gut just tells me this is what will happen. And I concede that my gut is brainless and often incorrect and that I'm not so confident in said gut to actually pay Vegas a visit and talk with my wallet, but there you have hit. Rays 2009: 92 wins. Not for any good reason.

And I hope I am wrong. I would love to see them become a 100-win juggernaut.

8 playoff teams per league = more teams with playoff hopes late in the season = another round of playoffs = more revenue

Yuck. If baseball adopts that format, I might stop watching. Why water down the playoffs? Baseball is one of the rare sports nowadays where making the playoffs is still an accomplishment. I'd rather the Jays miss the playoffs every year until I die than make it every year as an 8th seed in a clustered playoff format. A little dramatic, I know, but I can't stand the 16-team format in other sports. It makes mediocrity acceptable, and it's not something to be proud of, IMO. The Raptors, for example, making the playoffs last season at .500 just to predictably get their butts handed to them by a vastly superior team was not something I was anticipating in any way.

Let's reward success, rather than redistribute it to those who can't accomplish it.

I'm curious about what you see that projects Romero as a potential mid-rotation starter.

Chuck, pure conjecture on my part.  No real numbers to state my case.  BUT, my point of view is based on the feeling that for the Jays to use the #6 OVERALL pick in the draft on Romero, they must've projected him to be a future #3 starter MINIMUM!  I can't see ANY team using a top 10 pick on a pitcher and hoping he pans out as no better than Jesse Litsch or Josh Towers (i.e. a back end of the rotation filler).

Here's who they have ready to go in 2009 according to the BP top 100 prospect list, pitchers David Price #6, Wade Davis #15, Jacob McGee #40 and short stop Reid Brignac #25.

Not so fast.  Price, yes, absolutely.  He's ready for about 150 big league innings.  Davis may be ready sometime in '09, but could also use some more time in the minors.  He's made nine starts in AAA after posting some questionable splits in AA.  McGee is out until at least July after Tommy John surgery and thus is more than a year away, minimum.  Finally, Brignac has struggled for two full years now posting an OPS of 761 in AA and 711 this year in AAA.  Now, he's still only going to be 23 on Opening Day so he's far from a bust but the past two seasons have put a wrinkle in his prospect status.

I think any regression with the Rays will happen through the pitching staff which has been outstanding this year. There is no reason to think that Kazmir, Shields, and Garza will not continue to be well above average pitchers for the remainder of their careers. There is no reason to think that Santana doesn't still have unrealized potential and that Sonnanstine isn't the real deal.

What there is reason to think about is whether or not this exceptionally young group of starters will be able to start 153 games again next year.

Work load by innings, previous 3 seasons:

Garza:  50, 83, 184.7 -- so more innings thrown this year then in the past 2 seasons combined. He's going to be 25.

Sonnanstine: This guy has been a workhorse over the past few years. As a 21 year old he threw 58 innings in the low minors. At 22 he threw 180 innings. At 23 he threw 186. At 24 he threw 201. This year, as a 25 year old, he threw 193 innings. Here is a young man who has thrown 820 innings before his 26th birthday. Does he have an arm like Jamie Moyer, or Dontrelle Willis?

Shields: 124.7, 215, and 215 again this year. Entering age 27 season.

Kazmir: As a 19 year old he threw 109, at 20 he threw 134, at 21 186, at 22 144.7, at 23 206.7, at 24 164.3. This young man has thrown 944.7 innings before his 25th birthday. Here are a list of arm related injuries that have affected him over his MLB career:  July 30, 06 - Shoulder Injury, placed on 15 day DL. Aug 26, 2006 - Shoulder injury, placed on 15 day DL. March 25, 2008 - strained left elbow, placed on 15 day DL. Ended up missing 30 games. On July 19, 2008 his status was "day to day" for "rest". This is not new information - he has been and continues to be an injury concern.

And Edwin Jackson - 990 innings thrown between the minors and majors before his age 25 season.

I'm not an expert on young pitcher arm workloads - and obviously innings is only one consideration. Pitch counts? Game lengths? Etc. - We don't know (or at least I don't). But to me, it seems like this particular group of young pitchers has thrown a lot of innings between them. It is certainly not out of the realm of possibility that one or two of them go down with significant injuries in 2009.

And would that put Price into the rotation? And then that brings us to the question of - if say Sonnastine or Jackson goes down and Price moves into the rotation, might that not be an upgrade?

Arg... I still think any Rays regression is likely to come from the pitching rotation. That's a lot of innings. Longoria, Upton, Baldelli, Crawford, Navarro will comprise what again will be an excellent, balanced lineup. 

"Hmm... a 30 team playoff... almost like the NHL in the early 80's when 16 of 21 made the playoffs."

Or a slowpitch tournament where every team, even those that lose their first 2 games still have a chance to win the B or C division.

To me it's all about having fun(as a fan for me) and seeing my team have a chance to make the playoffs and advance if possible so hell yeah, bring on 8 teams per league as it will help negate the big bucks and divisional advantages and at least give more team AND fans some hope!

				ZIPS			Real			Spread		
Name		P	Age	AVG	OBP	SLG	AVG	OBP	SLG	AVG	OBP	SLG
Dioner Navarro	c	24	.244	.313	.365	.295	.349	.407	.051	.036	.042
Carlos Pena	1b	30	.266	.400	.531	.247	.377	.494	(.019)	(.023)	(.037)
Akinori Iwamura	2b	29	.286	.358	.408	.274	.349	.380	(.012)	(.009)	(.028)
Evan Longoria	3b	22	.260	.350	.436	.272	.343	.531	.012	(.007)	.095
Jason Bartlett	ss	28	.275	.341	.367	.286	.329	.361	.011	(.012)	(.006)
Carl Crawford	lf	26	.316	.356	.479	.273	.319	.400	(.043)	(.037)	(.079)
B.J. Upton	cf	23	.278	.363	.452	.273	.383	.401	(.005)	.020	(.051)
Gabe Gross	rf	28	.264	.358	.426	.242	.333	.434	(.022)	(.025)	.008
Cliff Floyd	dh	35	.261	.350	.469	.268	.349	.455	.007	(.001)	(.014)
Eric Hinske	ut	30	.248	.335	.437	.247	.333	.465	(.001)	(.002)	.028
Willy Aybar	ut	25	None			.253	.327	.410			

Player		Ag	Prj	Real	Spread
James Shields	26	4.38	3.56	(0.82)
AndySonnanstine	25	4.79	4.38	(0.41)
Edwin Jackson	24	5.56	4.42	(1.14)
Matt Garza	24	4.21	3.70	(0.51)
Scott Kazmir	24	3.64	3.49	(0.15)
				
Troy Percival	38	3.14	4.53	1.39
Dan Wheeler	30	4.25	3.12	(1.13)
Trever Miller	35	3.75	4.15	0.40
J.P. Howell	25	4.86	2.22	(2.64)
Grant Balfour	30	4.71	1.54	(3.17)

a guy like Tex makes their offence ridiculously good

The Yankees scored 4.87 R/G compared to the league average of 4.78. One presumes that Teixeira would replace Giambi. While that would surely represent a huge defensive improvement, I can't see that the offensive improvement would catapult the team to "ridiculously good". Teixeira's OPS+ was 153 (134 career). Giambi's was 130.

even Sabathia's not going to help that sorry excuse for a rotation.

Sabathia would help anybody's rotation, especially one that you characterize as weak.

As for the rotation, the only guys who could regress are Jackson and Sonnanstine; I'm not their biggest fans but they continue to prove me wrong even with their bad peripherals.

Sonnanstine's peripherals are most definitely not bad. His rates with the league averages in brackets:
HR/9:  1.0 (1.0)
K/9:  5.8 (6.6)
BB/9:  1.7 (3.3)
K/BB:  3.4 (2.0)

He is below average on the K front but has excellent command and keeps the ball in the park.

If he [Aybar] had an everyday role(like he'll get next year), he would have hit around 20 homers.

I'm assuming you believe he'll be the fulltime DH next season? There is reason for skepticism on that front. Against RHP he was 245/313/390 and for his career it's 268/354/406.

Ken Rosenthal spoke with JP today, and then wrote an article.

JP spoke of AJ, Manny and Scoots.

Talented mid-career vets Crawford and Pena actually slipped somewhat this year and can be expected to rebound.

Pena? Anyone who is betting on Pena "rebounding" anywhere close to his 2007 numbers I'd take a piece of that action (if I had any money).

Pena this year was FAR coloser to his career norms than 2007 was. My bet is he's closer to 110 OPS+ next year than he is even to the 127 he posted this season.

Crawford will likely rebound....so will Rios. And when both are at their peak Rios is a better player.

  Kazmir and Shields are studs,

So are Doc and McGowan (Yes McGowan is coming off injury but kaz is no Doc either)

and there are numerous good supporting players who are in their prime or aren't old enough to be likely to implode -

Bartlett = Scutero

Iwamarua, < Hill

Aybar < Inglett, no better than Bautista

Gross << Lind

Zobrist  Maybe a point here but the season isn't gonna turn on him

Hinske = generic free agent

Balfour = Carlson

Wheeler << League (and which of these is going to get better?

Sonnastine = Purcey (at best)

Jackson - if he's in the rotation Price isn't and vice-versa. I would not be at all surprised if Casey Janssen cna and does have a better season next year than jackson

hammels - Would be something like the 8th best reliver on the Jays as measured by ERA+

are in the same boat off the mound.  Throw in Price and this team looks scary good to me. 

And having accounted for the players you mentioned, there's no BJ Ryan or Scott Downs on the Rays.

26  99  90  17  26  8  1  4  12   9  15  .289  .343  .533  .876

Is this what we can expect next year? No clue, but it'd be foolish to rule it out.
Now it is certainly true that Longoria seems to be a monster in the making 
(albeit they call it sophomore slump for a reason) and he seems certain to oupreform 
Rolen....but I would not consign rolen to the scrap heap just yet.

SP2-Shields versus Litsch-Sorry,...
SP3-5-Garza, Price, Sonnetstein versus Marcum, McGowen, Purcey,
etc...With Marcum healthy, this is only a slight edge to the Rays. With

You seem to switch back and forth from next year to future years when it helps your case.

If we are talking about next year I already conceeded that.
If we are talking about outlying future years then litsch isn't #2 and the caveat
about marcum's health is irrelevant.
him and Mcgowen hurt, this is a massive edge.

As for prospects, you don't put the number one overall pick from last year, Tim Beckham in there.

I clearly said I was using last year's Top 10. It was not designed to be a comparison of current top
10 players but rather an illustration of how little value being a top 10 players held. There was a time 
when Curtis Thigpen was in the Jays top 10, Russ Adams too. And by the way, the Jays just signed two former top 5 
picks so Beckham isn't proof of anything yet.

It's not about Rays fans versus Jays fans, it's about the vast majority
who are neither. If you ask a knowledgeable random baseball fan to compare the teams, 
it's not going to be close.

And how are those fans "knowledgeable"? almost always bey reading the exact same publications 
who never thought Marcum or Janssen were top prospects but thought Thigpen and Adams were.
I love reading about and talking about the future of prospects as well as anyone, but I will concede
that Price has Cecil beat when he does something Cecil can't do.
I acknowledge Price is more highly praised. i also point to that group of guys in the unemployment line
who were once highly praised.