Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine

Joe Posnanski writes about JP Ricciardi, again, and points out some of the contradictions in the Blue Jays GM.

“You would really like J.P. if you got to spend some time with him,” one friend in baseball told me. “He’s really a good guy and a good baseball guy.”

“You would really hate J.P.,” another friend in baseball told me. And so it goes.



The article discusses the two sides of JP, is he a "scouts guy" or not, does he embrace sabermetircs or not, can he compete on a low payroll in the AL East or not?  (you have to get through the Michael Jordan stuff to get to the meat of the JP commentary).

He also adds this comment which is new to me:

On the one hand he seems a smart guy, on the other hand several people who have worked for him have told me that he does not want dissent or thoughtful dialogue in his organization, which is pretty dumb for someone trying to beat the Yankees and Red Sox.

We have discussed JP a lot on this site but I think this article lays out the enigma that is JP.

The story also discusses an interview with JP that the Canadian Press published this week where JP says that whoever the GM is in Toronto the team will have trouble competing in the AL East.  On one hand you can say that is the reality of life in the AL East but several writers have taken umbrage at that statement claiming JP is reversing his opinion when he was hired.  Also other writers have complained about the defeatist attitide in his comments.   Competing with Boston and the Yankees can do that to you.

Peter Gammons of ESPN is sympathetic to the Jays predicament in fighting the Yankees and Red Sox for a playoff spot each season.  He writes in favour of adding an extra wild card to the playoffs.

On the other hand, it would be an advantage to teams such as the Rays and Blue Jays that compete against the economic powers in New York and Boston.

Joel Sherman of the NY Post agrees with Gammons:

But I do feel for the Rays, Orioles and Blue Jays who do have to compete annually with the Yankees and Red Sox. And it is because of them that I have added another reason for an extra wild card.

Back in the eighties and nineties teams like the Jays could compete with the Yankees and Red Sox because those teams were poorly managed.  However with the big dollars in baseball now, and thanks in part to Michael Lewis's Moneyball, teams are very aware now of the importance of good management.  Today it is hard to see a time when the Yankees and Sox will fall back to earth.  This is not really a baseball problem but an AL East problem.  But baseball could turn into a north american version of european soccer where the same teams compete for the championships every year and the lesser teams compete to finish in the top fourth of the leagues knowing the top spot is out of reach.  Will the AL East become a league where the Jays consider it a victory if they finish third?

Joe Posnanski Doesn't Get JP | 124 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Pistol - Saturday, September 26 2009 @ 12:57 PM EDT (#206484) #
It sounds like Posnanski gets JP right on the money.
Chuck - Saturday, September 26 2009 @ 12:58 PM EDT (#206485) #

Will the AL East become a league where the Jays consider it a victory if they finish third?

While finishing 3rd has now become a legitimate challenge due to TB's emergence, I don't think the fans will respond to the moral victory of finishing only behind New York and Boston. They didn't when doing so was easy and they won't much care now that it's more difficult.

Fans don't care about context, just the bottom line. To many, the payroll disparity issue is "just an excuse". That's the burden the next GM will be stuck with.

LouisvilleJayFan - Saturday, September 26 2009 @ 01:10 PM EDT (#206486) #
Three words:

HARD SALARY CAP


Chuck - Saturday, September 26 2009 @ 01:14 PM EDT (#206487) #

Three words: HARD SALARY CAP

A whole bunch of words: why on earth would the union ever agree to such a thing?

Richard S.S. - Saturday, September 26 2009 @ 01:15 PM EDT (#206488) #
To compete in this division, you must be mistake-free.  You must draft very well, without regard to slot.  You must leave no stone unturned, turning them all.  You must have $125.0 Million per season to compete with.  And your trades must be perfect.  This is not JP.
Thomas - Saturday, September 26 2009 @ 01:20 PM EDT (#206489) #
It sounds like Posnanski gets JP right on the money.

I agree.

That interview with the Canadian Press was ridiculous. If the camel's back wasn't broken before it is now.

Magpie - Saturday, September 26 2009 @ 01:58 PM EDT (#206490) #
To compete in this division, you must be mistake-free.

Not if you're the Yankees or the Red Sox. No shortage of mistakes, no shortage of bad trades. No problem.
Dave Till - Saturday, September 26 2009 @ 02:01 PM EDT (#206491) #
I've never met J.P., but I get the impression that he's one of those people who isn't naturally diplomatic: he prides himself on his candidness and his willingness to shoot from the hip. This has led to some interesting things getting into print, such as the Adam Dunn comment. This might also explain the apparent lack of consistency in his remarks: if you're prone to saying what's on your mind at any given moment, naturally what you say will depend on how you feel at that moment. (His bluntness has led to prolonged running feuds with some of Toronto's sportswriters, which doesn't help his situation much - any time he says something self-damaging, his detractors are eager to rush it into print.)

I've always believed, semi-facetiously, that J.P.'s problem is that he just isn't lucky enough to be a major-league general manager. In retrospect, you have to say that he didn't do a bad job building the 2008 Jays. Despite all the things that went wrong with that team - two injuries to Wells, a season-ending concussion for Hill, a freak accident for Rolen, multiple pitcher injuries, and Frank Thomas deciding to grow old all at once instead of incrementally - the team still won 86 games and should (Pythagorically speaking) have won more.

I think that J.P. is right on the money with his comments to the Canadian Press: what he is being asked to do is impossible. No one can be asked to beat the Yankees and Red Sox unless given a player development and acquisition budget similar to those of the Yankees and Red Sox. (Tampa Bay did it in 2008, but that's mostly because all of their starting pitchers stayed healthy. Had the Jays been able to keep a rotation of Halladay, Burnett, Marcum, McGowan and Litsch going all year last year, they would have put up comparable numbers.) The job of General Manager of the Toronto Blue Jays is, at this moment, an impossible job to perform adequately.

What happens next is anyone's guess. Will ownership try to put more money into the team - in particular, into the scouting and development side, to ensure that the best available players are drafted and signed? My gut feeling is that the Rogers bean counters have looked at the numbers and decided that no, this isn't a viable business proposition. And you can't really blame them - things have to break just right to make money in the baseball business, and it's probably easier just to try to flog more specialty channel packs.

I also believe that MLB doesn't really care about the downtrodden foot-soldiers of the AL East. The Yankees are the team that people love, or the team that people love to hate; either way, people will watch them. That brings in the money. The only way that things will change is if the Yankees get too greedy: what if they decide to sign three or four *more* free agents next season and bump their payroll up to $250 million? At some point, the competitive structure of the league might just seem too ludicrous to be sustainable.

But it's worth recalling this: the norm in the history of the American League is for the Yankees to win everything. They won regularly in the Babe Ruth era, in the Joe DiMaggio era, and in the Mickey Mantle era.

TamRa - Saturday, September 26 2009 @ 02:05 PM EDT (#206492) #
Back in the eighties and nineties teams like the Jays could compete with the Yankees and Red Sox because those teams were poorly managed.


Nope.

I mean sure, maybe they were poorly run - but the reason there was competition was that there was little relative distance between the top payroll teams and the mid-payroll teams.

Starting about 2001 or 2002 the gap between the Yankees and the mid market team became very large ( I pointed this out in the other thread) and the gap between the Red Sox and the pack was larger than the overall spread from top to bottom in 1990.

THAT is that's different now.

to my way of thinking, IF you were going to go with a cap, i wouldn't go with a set figure, I'd suggest a percentage. Say, for instance, the ceiling was 200% of whatever the average payroll was the previous year.

I still say though, that taking the best 4 teams regardless of division is a much better solution than an extra wild card just because having 5 playoff teams just screws up the format.


TamRa - Saturday, September 26 2009 @ 02:10 PM EDT (#206493) #
and in case, I didn't make the point clearly, JP has grounds to be bitter - what he ended up facing was NOT what anyone would have gueed he'd have to face the day he was hired. When he sits there in October 2001 and says "you can compete in this division" the gap between the Yankees and most everyone else was VERY reasonable, especially compared to what is was 5 years later.


Mike Green - Saturday, September 26 2009 @ 02:17 PM EDT (#206494) #
But it's worth recalling this: the norm in the history of the American League is for the Yankees to win everything. They won regularly in the Babe Ruth era, in the Joe DiMaggio era, and in the Mickey Mantle era.

That was certainly true in the Mantle-Berra era.  The Tigers competed pretty well in the DiMaggio era, winning pennants in 34, 35, 40 and 45 thanks to Greenberg and Gehringer.  The A's competed pretty well in the Ruth/Gehrig era, thanks to Grove, Foxx and Cochrane. 

If you look at it more broadly, the Tigers were competitive through a number of eras.  Money is a huge boost, but managerial acumen has played an important role.  There is no reason in the medium term (intrinsically) why the Jay budget could not be comparable to the Red Sox budget, and actually more than the Tiger budget.  This would leave open the possibility that wise management could lead to championships, although not with the regularity that they seem them in New York.
bball12 - Saturday, September 26 2009 @ 02:58 PM EDT (#206495) #
No question that the money plays a big role. But it isnt the whole story.

When you look closely at teams like the Yankees and Red Sox - and you watch what they do with their minor league teams - it is impressive.

Money helps there also - no doubt - but they reward performance.

The Blue Jays dont reward performance. They try to save face for bad draft picks.
Regardless of how ridiculous the facts are.

All you have to do is go and watch the minor league games - and you can feel the difference.
The players know it - and it shows in how they play.

In organizations like the Yankees, Red Sox, et al - performance actually matters. If you dont play well - you are gone.

In the Blue Jays organization - if you dont play well - and you are an early rounder - you dont really care all that much - because you will probably be promoted the next year anyway.

Again - go to some of the games - and watch some of these guys. Alot of guys in the blue Jays organization are just going through the motions.

You will not see that in the Yankees/Red Soc etc... minor league teams.

Until that changes - keep your calculator handy and get ready to tabulate the losses.






ramone - Saturday, September 26 2009 @ 03:03 PM EDT (#206496) #

"In the Blue Jays organization - if you dont play well - and you are an early rounder - you dont really care all that much - because you will probably be promoted the next year anyway."

I don't know if this is 100% correct, all of the Dunedin kids will be repeating their level next year including first rounder selection Kevin Ahrens, JP said prior to Arencibia going for his kidney surgery that Arencibia didn't play well enough for a sept call up, David Cooper will likely be in AA again next year.

Mylegacy - Saturday, September 26 2009 @ 03:10 PM EDT (#206497) #
I - like some others - have been down on JP since the too often retold O'Dog Pimp saga. At the time I was afraid his thin skin (as I saw it) would lead to mistakes. As a Management Consultant one of the KEY points I teach managers is to leave your "ego" at home. Never make a decision because "I" made that decision - make a decision because - when you made it - and considering the facts at that time - it was the appropriate conclusion to come to - AND - I can defend it. IF others subsequently present information that you didn't know - or had undervalued - when the decision was made - you can revisit it. You NEVER tie your "ego" to your decisions. (Sorry for that ramble) BUT because of that I knew JP was going to be flawed.

Funnily - I've grown to like him more over the years - even though I remain convinced he has serious flaws. I love what he did with Tiny Tim Collins. I love LOTS that he's done - in fact I love MOST of what he's done. I'd like him to stay.

The WORSE thing that happened during his tenure was the Wells contract - and I'm POSITIVE that wasn't his work - I'm sure he'd never have done it if "Higher" authorities had now insisted.

JP - you can be a royal pain at times - but I'm happy you've been our GM. IF you stay - GREAT. IF you go - all the very best in the future - I'd love to spend an afternoon at the game with you just shooting the breeze about the Jays, baseball and pimps. All the best!

bball12 - Saturday, September 26 2009 @ 03:26 PM EDT (#206498) #
The easy way out is always to blame the guy at the top. Just the way it is.
I think that JP gets blamed for alot of things that arent his doing - but it comes with the territory.

As a fan however  - blaming JP is in many ways a waste of time.

The bottom line - if players stink for 3 seasons in a row  - they most likely will stink for the next 3 years - and the next 3 years after that. Thats just a fact.

The Blue Jays need to talk to some of their younger "prospects" - and let them know - that bagging a half a million - or a million - doesnt guarantee them anything.

You need to perform - potential never wins games - only proven performance does.

To be honest - I am sick of having to read about early round draft picks - that stink - day in and day out. Just tired of the excuses - and the age nonsense and all the rest of the BS.

Hopefully - Toronto management will feel that way at some point as well - and manage the system accordingly.
All IMO


Mick Doherty - Saturday, September 26 2009 @ 04:24 PM EDT (#206499) #

But it's worth recalling this: the norm in the history of the American League is for the Yankees to win everything. They won regularly in the Babe Ruth era, in the Joe DiMaggio era, and in the Mickey Mantle era.

And at the outset of the free agent era, also The Reggie Jackson era. And in the first half of the Derek Jeter era.

But the tide has turned, with brief interruptions of success, in the past 45 years. Consider; from 1964 -- 13 years of no titles, then a run of success with four AL pennants and two titles in six years from 1976-81; then 15 years of no titles followed by six AL pennants and four titles in eight years from 1996-2003; nothing for the past five years.

Relative to other teams, that is wildly successful, true. Relative to Yankee dynasties past, that's ... erratic. Just for example elsewhere, the Reds have one title in the last 33 years and none in 19; the Rangers have none, in what is now 37 years. Do we really need to mention the Indians and Cubs?

So the Jays, now at 17 years without a title, are really quite middle-of-the-road in MLB.

greenfrog - Saturday, September 26 2009 @ 09:27 PM EDT (#206501) #
The benefits of having a big payroll go beyond being able to afford better big-league players. It also allows teams to spend more on the draft, international free agents and scouting, high school and college scouting, advance major-league scouting, coaches, managers, front office, etc. I think the high-spending teams have figured this out and are now working at being competitive on all fronts. Being outbid for that marquee free agent in the off-season is only the most visible aspect of the discrepancy between rich and poor ballclubs.
Jays2010 - Saturday, September 26 2009 @ 10:55 PM EDT (#206502) #

As a long time JP apologist even I have had to resign myself to the fact that he probably has to go fairly soon (though I still would be okay with him finishing out his contract). Not because he has done a poor job - but because I see little upside in keeping him at this point, espescially when so much of the fanbase seems to hate him with a passion.

However, if I were a national league team - pretty much any one of them - I would gladly have JP as my GM. From 2006 when the Jays were bumped into the middle of the pack in payroll, he has pretty much had a team that should compete as a top 10 team in baseball every year (with a balanced schedule of course). And he has clearly improved "on the job". But I don't think there is any way to suggest he can actually bring this team back to contention (even if he has developed those skills...nobody notices).

I pretty much stopped paying attention to the Jays this year once Rios was dumped...but I'd like to suggest possibly trading Ricky Romero (depending on the return). I don't see him as any better than Zep or Cecil (though he looks like a mid-rotation starter I suppose) and this franchise is in desperate need of position players, moreso than 2/3 starters who will eventually need TJ surgery. So how about Ricky Romero for Carlos Gonzalez. Not sure who is worth more now (though it should be noted that 250 AB's ago Gonzalez was merely a piece in the Holliday deal and young left-handed pitchers are presumably worth more than position players). The Rockies don't need a CF and we need to move our $126 mill CF to a corner. The organization doesn't have an ace after Doc anyway - and I am more than satisfied to fill the 2-5 spots with Zep/Cecil/Marcum/Richmond/Stewart etc...

Here's to an interesting off-season.

Magpie - Saturday, September 26 2009 @ 11:35 PM EDT (#206503) #
I am sick of having to read about early round draft picks

Do you mean Aaron Hill? Or are you thinking of Adam Lind? Ricky Romero, perhaps?
zeppelinkm - Sunday, September 27 2009 @ 12:32 AM EDT (#206504) #

Lind and Hill are great. Romero will always drive me crazy due to the circumstances surrounding him. It keeps me up at night knowing we passed on Tulowitzki.

 

Thomas - Sunday, September 27 2009 @ 01:01 AM EDT (#206505) #
Do you mean Aaron Hill? Or are you thinking of Adam Lind? Ricky Romero, perhaps?

Now Magpie, the poster was probably talking about Snider and Cecil. Those two never did anything to deserve their promotions.

Thomas - Sunday, September 27 2009 @ 01:02 AM EDT (#206506) #
Or maybe Casey Janssen and Shaun Marcum. Those two certainly rested on their laurels after being early round picks.
Richard S.S. - Sunday, September 27 2009 @ 04:46 AM EDT (#206508) #

Oops!

Richard S.S. - Sunday, September 27 2009 @ 03:09 AM EDT (#206507) #

Not if you're the Yankees or the Red Sox. No shortage of mistakes, no shortage of bad trades. No problem.

To be fair, neither the Red Sox, nor the Yankees had Payroll restrictions, while trying to buy their Home Field.  They didn't restrict draft picks to the total exclusion of High School Players.  They didn't follow the blind adherence to the Slot Toronto did.  There are more problems inherrent to Toronto than a sound Management Structure and an extra $50.0 M - $125.0 M in cash. That should cover almost anything.

Richard S.S. - Sunday, September 27 2009 @ 09:13 AM EDT (#206510) #

At least someone is making less doom and gloom suggestions as to the off-season.  Take a good look: http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/mikewilner/2009/09/26/its-not-a-rebuild-its-a-remodel/   He's right about one thing, we can trade a lot of top value and still be strong in the minors, and powerful on the big league roster.

seags83 - Sunday, September 27 2009 @ 11:28 AM EDT (#206511) #
Like some of you, I haven't always been sure of what to make of JP throughout his time here in Toronto.  He's had his good moments and his not-so-good.  What strikes me as a bit odd, and please correct me if I'm completely nuts, but shouldn't more of our blame go towards the owners of our ball club?  I mean, we're talking about Rogers here.  They aren't exactly a 'ma and pop' shop.  Could it be that JP (or anyone else) isn't the problem and that we need new owners who can match the payroll size of the Yankees and Redsox?  Don't get me wrong, I am a big fan of all that Rogers has done for this ballclub; major upgrades to the Dome, increased payroll, etc., but if they REALLY wanted to win championships, shouldn't they open their pocketbooks a little more to allow the club a fair chance?
ayjackson - Sunday, September 27 2009 @ 11:49 AM EDT (#206513) #

One good thing about Rogers - they love a write-off.  (see Thomas, Frank and Ryan, BJ)

They seem a little tempermental in their support for the Blue Jays, but at least money has been there at times.  In fact, the evidence is that it has always been there (according to Beeston).  The only reason it wasn't there this year, presumably, is that Beeston didn't request it - asked them to sit on it.  Rogers plays the role of the bad guy, but evidence is foggy as to who slapped the handcuffs on JP.  If you beleive Beeston, it's him.

Jim - Sunday, September 27 2009 @ 04:58 PM EDT (#206521) #
Wilner:

I’m thinking you package “local” folk Travis Snider, Scott Richmond and Lyle Overbay (paying some of his freight) and toss in Brett Cecil and an additional prospect-type (Justin Jackson?  Brad Mills?  Daniel Farquhar?  Reider Gonzalez?) to pry King Felix away from the Mariners.  That’s one.

Mike, you are willing to toss in Justin Jackson or Brad Mills?  Wow, how generous of you. 

Jim - Sunday, September 27 2009 @ 05:03 PM EDT (#206522) #
Wilner's first suggestion was ridiculous.  The second is beyond absurd:

It now becomes Marc Rzepczynski or David Purcey, Casey Janssen, Edwin Encarnacion and one of those additional prospect pitchers that didn’t move in the Hernandez deal for Fielder, who will be a  free agent after 2010, and Hardy, who will be a free agent after 2011.  That’s two and three.

That is one of the single most ridiculously lopsided trade suggestions I've ever seen.   If you put Encarnacion on waivers you probably couldn't get anyone to even claim him, nevermind trade for him.  I love how it's Zep or Purcey. 

Fielder:  299/409/600 
StephenT - Sunday, September 27 2009 @ 05:24 PM EDT (#206523) #
"Today it is hard to see a time when the Yankees and Sox will fall back to earth."

Try to think back to 2008.
AWeb - Sunday, September 27 2009 @ 06:17 PM EDT (#206524) #
Try to think back to 2008.

In 2008, the Red Sox and Yankees won 95 and 89 games respectively. The Jays haven't won 89 games since...1993 of course. Even the "back to earth" versions of the clubs had the 3rd and 4th most wins in the league. That's the "worst case" for those clubs the Jays must defeat. The Yankess at 87 wins or more 14 straight years, and the Red Sox at 86 wins or more 8 straight years (12 straight at 82 wins+).  I find 2008 a depressing case - the Jays were very very good, and still finished fourth (pythagorus thinks they deserved second, but that doesn't count).

Anyway, how about that Seattle series, huh? Lind establishes himself with a few late-inning memories to top off the year, Halladay pitches a shutout, and fans go home happy. I noticed Millar even batted severnth, instead of cleanup, and Ruiz finally got into another game.
Ryan Day - Sunday, September 27 2009 @ 07:23 PM EDT (#206525) #
If you put Encarnacion on waivers you probably couldn't get anyone to even claim him, nevermind trade for him.

Sure, I can't see why anyone would want a 27-year-old third baseman who hit 26 homers just two years ago and will be making under $5 million.

He's not going to bring back Fielder, obviously, but come on. The White Sox claimed Rios, who was nearly as bad without the excuse of injury, is older, and owed much more money.
VBF - Sunday, September 27 2009 @ 10:28 PM EDT (#206526) #

Thought this article was kind of interesting re: artificial turf.

Tampa Bay is examining possible sites for a new ballpark, which would have grass. While the Rays for now have to play on artificial turf under the last fixed dome in the major leagues, the Blue Jays could put in grass because their roof retracts.

"We could do it, but it would probably be a really, really expensive, proposition for us," general manager J.P. Ricciardi said. "It's been a thought, but I just don't think it makes sense for us financially."

Yeah, you've only had the last two third basemen ask for trades partially due to the surface they play on, a 126 million dollar centerfielder who's become one of the worst defensive centerfielders in baseball and no stranger to injury, and a left fielder with a thick build who's knees will surely have troubles playing on artificial turf for at least the next 5+ years, and that's not financially viable?

Unless it costs a billion dollars to have real grass, I don't see how protecting 90+ million dollars worth of athletes per year isn't financially viable.

I would also love to get my hands on a list of how many players specifically won't come to Toronto because of the artificial turf.

Jim - Sunday, September 27 2009 @ 11:04 PM EDT (#206527) #
How quickly do you think Ken Williams would send Rios back? 

I guess Encarnacion might get claimed.  It didn't take long to see why Cincinnati and many of their fans hated him.  If Toronto can find someone to take EE's contract off their hands they should make that deal immediately.  Even his best year in Cinci he was only a 2 WAR player.  The defense looks every bit as bad as the numbers say it is. 

A decently high home run total in a bandbox a few years ago is the only thing that you could even consider hanging your hat on. 

If I'm going to try and develop young pitchers the last thing I need is a butcher at the hot corner.  This team is already fielding a poor outfield defense, they can't punt the infield as well.   I know it's only been 150 plate appearances since he got to Toronto, but I've seen enough.

Ryan Day - Sunday, September 27 2009 @ 11:39 PM EDT (#206528) #
How quickly do you think Ken Williams would send Rios back?

Pretty damn quick, I imagine. But waivers don't come with a return policy, and smarter GMs than Kenny Williams have done stranger things before breakfast.
ComebyDeanChance - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 12:01 AM EDT (#206530) #
When the Skydome was in planning stage, there was one local columnist who campaigned for a grass field. He lost out to the more modern and thus wiser voices who 'knew' that artificial turf was a preferable surface. That was Bob Elliott.
brent - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 12:53 AM EDT (#206531) #
The other problem is the football being played there too. You probably can't keep grass through that too.
Chuck - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 06:23 AM EDT (#206533) #

A decently high home run total in a bandbox a few years ago is the only thing that you could even consider hanging your hat on.

It was last year that he hit 26 homeruns. The home/road split was 15/11.

His OPS+'s the last three years (before this one) have been 108, 101, 106.

Dave Till - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 06:30 AM EDT (#206534) #
The problem with natural grass and Toronto is April. In the "wild", as it were, grass fields aren't viable until May: the temperatures aren't warm enough to guarantee green until mid-April, and lawns are soggy with water from winter snowmelt. Clever management might get around this problem, but there's no easy solution, given that Ted's Shed is a multi-use facility.

Exhibition Stadium went to artificial turf in the mid-1970s - before the Jays arrived - because the Ex's field tended to turn from grass into mud.

And Rolen didn't leave town because of the turf - he left because he wanted to be closer to home.

(Re Rios: it would be fascinating to see what happens if the Sox give up on Alex. The Jays could then re-sign him, but with Chicago paying the bills.)

Jim - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 07:06 AM EDT (#206535) #
His OPS+'s the last three years (before this one) have been 108, 101, 106.

Is this supposed to be a good thing?  OPS+ doesn't capture what should be a huge NL Central discount.  Take that into account and he's a below league average bat at what in theory is a somewhat offensive position.  Am I supposed to believe that age 27 is going to have a magic impact on a player who hasn't improved between age 23 and 26?  Throw in horrendous defense and a 222/315/393 line this year and I'll let someone else pay him 4 million plus.

Encarnacion is a perfect example of the type of player that is a total waste of time for this franchise.  He doesn't bring you any closer to the 2010 playoffs, he can't be used to acquire anything of value and he's way past his expiration date as a prospect. 


christaylor - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 08:00 AM EDT (#206536) #
I don't know where you get the idea of OPS+ needing a "huge NL central discount" as the stat is already weighted against league average you'd have to make the case that the NL central pitchers are significantly worse than the pitchers in other divisions. I don't see that as being the case and throw in that EE played on one of the poorer pitching teams in the division, the idea of his OPS+ needing a "discount" doesn't make sense. That his OPS+ have been above 100 by definition mean he's at least a league average bat and not a below league average bat as you suggest.

I'd just like to point out that Rolen's 2008 OPS+ was 107. An OPS+ in the 105-110 range is more than adequate for 3B. Encarnacion can be had on the cheap and has upside. His glove hasn't seemed as nearly as bad as advertised. He's exactly the sort of player the franchise needs if it is not going to spend the $120M that's been thrown around. If they are going to spend, then EE can be easily traded precisely because he's relatively cheap and has upside.
Jim - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 08:55 AM EDT (#206537) #

as the stat is already weighted against league average you'd have to make the case that the NL central pitchers are significantly worse than the pitchers in other divisions.

I don't really have the time or desire to build the statistical case that the NL Central is a weak division but I've seen enough things like Sabathia and Holliday go berzerk in the division to know it's not the AL East.  

Do we really need to compare the pitching staffs from New York, Boston and Tampa versus Houston, Milwaukee and Pittsburgh?  Houston has maybe two pitchers that could crack the Yankees top 10.  LaTroy Hawkins got destroyed in this division and he's Houston's top set up man.  The Brewers after Gallardo have Looper, Suppan, Parra and Bush.  Baltimore is better then that today.  Russ Ohlendorf is the Pirates' third starter.  Heck, half of Pittsburgh's staff is Yankee rejects: Ohlendorf, McCutchen, Karstens, Claggett.   Matt Capps would need a 5 run lead and 2 outs in the 9th to close out games in the AL East. 

The American League dominates the National League.  The American League East dominates the AL Central and AL West.  How can you not discount what Encarnacion did in Cincinnati?

 

Jim - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 09:02 AM EDT (#206538) #

I'd just like to point out that Rolen's 2008 OPS+ was 107. An OPS+ in the 105-110 range is more than adequate for 3B.

Encarnacion is not going to have a 105-110 OPS+ in the AL. 

Encarnacion can be had on the cheap and has upside.

Isn't it strange then that an even poorer team traded him?

His glove hasn't seemed as nearly as bad as advertised.

I think it's been worse.  4 years of consistently horrible metrics I guess we should throw out?

He's exactly the sort of player the franchise needs

Sure, if the goal is to be in 75 win purgatory from now til eternity.

then EE can be easily traded precisely because he's relatively cheap and has upside.

I must really be misreading the market on players who don't hit, can't field and make 4 million dollars.  If he has so much upside why was he better when he was 23 then he was when he was 25?   Aren't players with upside supposed to improve and not regress?

Ryan Day - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 09:19 AM EDT (#206539) #
If he has so much upside why was he better when he was 23 then he was when he was 25?   Aren't players with upside supposed to improve and not regress?

I'm sure St. Louis will be crushed to find out that Albert Pujols never had any upside, what with him being better at 23 than at 25. Ditto Joe Mauer and Miguel Cabrera.

Do you really think there are that many players who follow a smooth development path and never regress even a tiny little bit (which would be a reasonable assessment of the difference between Encarnacion's 06 and 08)?
Jim - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 10:00 AM EDT (#206540) #

I'm sure St. Louis will be crushed to find out that Albert Pujols never had any upside, what with him being better at 23 than at 25. Ditto Joe Mauer and Miguel Cabrera.

Do you really think there are that many players who follow a smooth development path and never regress even a tiny little bit (which would be a reasonable assessment of the difference between Encarnacion's 06 and 08)?

This is a serious argument?  It's a bit different when you are A: regressing from a 5th place finish in the MVP voting when you are 23 (Mauer, Cabrera finished 6th) and B: Not putting up an OPS+ below 90 in your age 26 season.  If the excuse is he stinks this year because he's hurt, then how does that increase his trade value or the chances he's better next year. 

Encarnacion will probably be here next year because there are so many other things that need to get done that it's about the 5th priority.  Next year when everyone is wondering why the young pitchers are struggling, it's because of decisions like Encarnacion as the everyday third baseman.

 

Paul D - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 10:34 AM EDT (#206541) #
Encarnacion is exactly the type of player the Jays should look at.  The Jays need to maximize, not minimize, risk to have a chance at winning.  Encarnacion is still young enough to have potential, and has some potential upside.
Jim - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 10:49 AM EDT (#206542) #
Of course they need players with upside.  My point is that Encarnacion doesn't have any and isn't worth what they pay him if he doesn't improve.
lexomatic - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 10:58 AM EDT (#206543) #
fwiw Jim, I'm going to disagree, and here's why. Because of the Jays budget situation (increased or not) they have to take chances on players, and trust in their staff to identify fixable flaws, and then take steps with the player to work on those issues. Arnsberg is potentially a good example of this. Cito & co's work with some of the hitter's as well, and Butterfield especially with infielders.
realistically there's not a great shot at contention next year, but EE may be a part of it.

1)During one of this weekend's games on the radio, they talked about how EE had made some spectacular plays since he's been here... though he also made some brutal plays. i can only take that so seriously, because i haven't seen for myself, but to me that suggests a lack of focus, but the tools are there. Butterfield does have a history of making players refine their skills defensively. If EE is willing to put the effort in, I'm pretty confident he can improve defensively to near league average.
I'm not disputing that his defense will not be a negative for young pitchers, but I am suggesting it won't be as huge a factor as you are attributing it (because i'd like to be optimistic about one thing next year, and Butterfield's track record is pretty good).

2)His bat is average, but he has shown the ability in different seasons to hit for some average, take a few walks and hit for some power. sometimes it takes players a few years to put it all together. if he can hit 270, an 850 ops is pretty realistic. that would outweigh regular defensive problems (but not if he's still a butcher). 290 30 hr and 75 walks seem like achievable career bests. Frank Thomas in 07 and Delgado in 03 were the last jays to even hit 275 with 25 hrs and 70 walks. It's not like the Jays couldn't use that kind of balanced offensive contribution. Hinske in 02 was 1 hr off.

3)How many players at 4 mil and under have his upside and relative youth and are relatively available? looking at this list there's not a lot of players i'd rather have (maybe 10 including old & young stars) and a lot of them would have much higher salaries.

http://espn.go.com/mlb/stats/batting/_/position/3b/qualified/false

Instead of just criticizing other people's responses I'd like you to suggest a course of action for once.
Jim - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 11:15 AM EDT (#206544) #

Instead of just criticizing other people's responses I'd like you to suggest a course of action for once.

I'm sorry that Wilner's trade suggestions are ridiculous.  Today he updated his proposal to Romero instead of Purcey, it's still a joke.   

I've given my course of action probably at least a dozen times:

The general manager and the field manager need to go next Monday morning. 

The present (2010) is a completely lost cause and any move that pretends that it isn't is a waste.  They have already held onto Halladay too long, and the only way to ever fix this organization is through the draft and amature free agents and we know how that went this year.

If you can get value for Frasor, Downs or Overbay you take it and don't look back.   I don't really see any other veterans that would bring anything back.

I've GOT to develop Cecil, Zep, Romero and whatever Halladay brings back.  Wells can't play center and Encarnacion can't play third, I've got to have a team that can play defense.  The pitching staff is not good enough nor deep enough to have a poor defense behind them.  I've already got a problem with Lind/Snider because you've got to put one of them in a corner OF spot and that isn't ideal.  Having a good defense is my best chance of building trade value in the only place I might end up having a surplus of talent and that's the pitching staff.

I offer Scutaro arbitration but know that he isn't going to accept.  I take the picks, I see no way he can live up to the next contract and even if he has this year 2 or 3 more times, it's not getting me to the playoffs.  I understand I'm going to have scrapheap catchers and a scrapheap SS, but it's better then paying Scutaro as he turns back into a pumpkin.

I know I'm going to lose a lot of games in 2010, 2011 and 2012.  I'd rather lose 95 for those years and at least have a plan to build towards instead of multiple seasons like this one where you lose 86 games and accomplish nothing for the near term or the long term.

 

 

AWeb - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 12:09 PM EDT (#206545) #
Encarnacion is, possibly, the worst defensive 3rd baseman in the majors - worst UZR/150 games in 2008, near worst in 2007 aside from Ryan Braun, worst in 2009 (among those with 600+ innings there). Sadly Bautista was much the same, so that's no solution. Even with the bad (but not Adam Dunn/Ryan Braun at third bad), if Encarnacion reverts to hitting his typical career .350/.450 type line, he's still useful at third. Someone has to play there, and he's a solidly average 3B (in total, not in the field, assuming he can hit to his career line). Not good enough for winning a pennant perhaps, but who else can the Jays run out there? No one in the minors is close to ready at that position, as far as I can tell. He's not that expensive. 5 million is probably a fair price for an average 3B. If those dollars prevent you from a big upgrade somewhere else, then it is a problem. Otherwise, it's 1/16 of the budget on a starting position player. That's OK.

Also, Is there any evidence at all that young pitchers can't develop without great defenses? I can see it in the extremes, and the Jays are a bad defense right now, but not that bad. I can see the upside - bad defense keeps inflated ERAs, arbitration and free agents demands down, and then you do what the Rays did last year (turn from horrible to great defensively all at once). No problem...as long as the origanization realizes that they have bad defense and doesn't undervalue their own pitching assets as a result.
Jim - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 12:19 PM EDT (#206546) #

If Encarnacion is the worst defensive player in the league and potentially has a league average bat, how is he a league average player? 

As for evidence.... how about the Blue Jays so far this year.  Using July 31st a cutoff as when the Rolen trade and Rios claim roughly went down.. the Jays were giving up 4.4 runs a game until that point.  It's 5.1 since.

Granted there is a lot of other noise in those numbers, but not having your two best defensive players has to be a big part of 0.7 runs a game.

China fan - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 12:27 PM EDT (#206547) #

Jim, you're actually calling that a PLAN?   To sum up:  you would dump any player who can be traded, accept 95 losses per year for the next three years, and "develop" three young pitchers -- who are already being developed quite nicely by the current management.  How does that constitute a "plan" or a "course of action" in any logical sense of the word?  Even when you are challenged to present a plan, all you can do is offer more doom and gloom.  It's no wonder that people are losing patience with your sweepingly defeatist comments.

You talk vaguely of "building trade value" in your pitchers -- but it's the current Jays management that has already done that, quite impressively, despite all your sniping.  The Jays already have a very deep collection of pitchers who can be used for trading value in the next one or two seasons.

Your only other specific "course of action", as far as I can discern, is to collect draft picks.  The Jays have actually done that in the past couple of seasons, and then were sabotaged by their cheapskate owners who failed to provide the money to sign them.  In this aspect of your "plan", you are simply repeating the obvious strategy -- collecting draft picks -- that almost every non-contending ball club has followed for decades.   The point is this:  if you're going to snidely dismiss the Jays as a bunch of dunces and dunderheads, we'd like to see the brilliant options that you've devised that the Jays have never thought about.  Failing that, it's just vague negativity.

Mylegacy - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 12:35 PM EDT (#206549) #
Someone mentioned "grass" at the Dome. FA-GET-ABOAT-IT! Ain't, CAN'T happen - and April isn't the problem. Grass DOESN'T work on indoor stadiums because of the air circulation. There are lots of articles on the internet tube thingys about it.

EE & Rolen. Last winter I said IF the Jays contended Rolen would end up being one of the main reasons. He was - is - NOT REPLACEABLE. SIGH. Having said that EE is better than anything we have in house and better than anything I can see available on the free agent or trade horizon.

Scoots. I SERIOUSLY suspect he is TERMINALLY BUGGERED - a torn plantar facia takes OVER A YEAR to cure. Scutaro is not lonly LOST to us - he is more or less loss to any other team AND NO ONE is going to risk losing a first draft choice to sign a guy who might just not EVER play again - at least not at a MLB level. FRIGGIN' SIGH! However, if he is not finished then his foot problem means when we offer him Arbitration - since no one will gamble of him long term - we can assuredly sign him to a one year deal.

Wilner. Winer's various proposals are cute, nice and totally from Lala Land.

Ruiz is AN EXCELLENT - CHEAP - VERY GOOD RISK for the DH next year. I'm a REAL fan of the guy!

Halladay. We HAVE to keep him. If just two of Romero, RZEPSKI, Cecil, Marcum, McGowan or whomever blossom - a REAL possibility then with the offense below - we can be contenders!

The offense. 
Scutaro (R) 379 OBP, 409 (SLG) { Assuming his foot scares off others and it somehow heels - er - heals.}
Overbay (L) 371, 467
Hill (R) 329, 496
Lind (L) 367, 547
Ruiz (R) 351, 531
Snider (L) 331, 417
Wells (R) 313, 417
EE (R) 288, 400
Barajas (R) 263, 410

One THROUGH seven - have at least a 50/50 shot at being a SERIOUS killers row. With a healthy starting five led by Roy (R), and with four of: Romero (L), Marcum (R), Cecil (L), McGowan (R), Rzepski (L), Richmond (R) and Tallet (L) we have a chance to be a SERIOUS team - a contender? We'd need a few breaks - BUT this team - this 2010 team - IS NOT CHOPPED LIVER!

Is it April yet? Go Jays!

Jim - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 12:53 PM EDT (#206550) #

Jim, you're actually calling that a PLAN? 

It's the only actual plan that I've seen anyone post on this website that can be executed without a huge increase in the payroll.   If you want to turn a blind eye to the reality of the situation this baseball team is in, why don't you blow us away with Wilner like ideas. 

Maybe you guys aren't paying attention, but this team besides Halladay has a team ERA+ of 89.  I know everyone here thinks this is a great pitching staff and is filled with a ton of great prospects, but the numbers don't reflect that. 

Romero probably has good value, but he's been giving some back in the second half of the season.  Rzepcynski had 11 good starts.  Who else could they possibly turn into valuable assets right now?  Cecil's year was close to disasterous.  Marcum and McGowan won't bring anyone back until they can prove they are healthy.  Stewart is proabably their most valuable arm now in the high minors, and he had to be combined with 2 other players to bring back a guy who makes $11 million next year at the deadline. 

The rest of the baseball world can see that the Jays need a total rebuild, so you can stop pretending like my opinion is an outlier just because I'm not going to cling to the notion that this is a team that has any chance in the world of catching the Yankees, Red Sox and Tampa anytime soon.

Jim - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 12:58 PM EDT (#206551) #

The offense. 

Your outfield is going to be Lind/Wells/Snider and you think that your pitchers are going to blossom?  Maybe once the Jays get finished petitioning for realignment and more playoff spots they can convince the AL to play with 3 DHs.

I like that you think Scutaro's career might be over and in the same post you hit him leadoff.

Mike D - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 01:18 PM EDT (#206553) #

seasons like this one where you lose 86 games

There goes Jim with his starry-eyed optimism again.  He's predicting a 4-2 road trip to end the season!  Why don't you take off your rose-coloured glasses every once in a while, ya big homer?

AWeb - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 02:01 PM EDT (#206554) #
If Encarnacion is the worst defensive player in the league and potentially has a league average bat, how is he a league average player?

An .800 OPS, which is well above average (average AL is .760), makes him league average overall. Hitting like he has so far in Toronto does not. He's not a great player, and not likely to be one (but youneverknow), but average will get it done for a few years until something better is available.

I'm not seeing any evidence that pitchers can't develop without a great defense, just that the team might give up more runs. Note that to me, pitchers can develop while giving up runs, as long as the organization realizes what is happening. Greinke developed despite lousy defense behind him. So did King Felix - now that he has a great defense (and better pitching of course), he looks all that much better, but his development seems to have gone along nicely with some bad defenses behind him. Again, I'm not against good defense, but not at the expense of trading off the ability to score even moreso. John McDonald is not a valid choice at SS next year, even if he can still pick it, for instance. You're willing to suffer through some lean years, and seem to prefer losing 3-2 to losing 6-4.  The team should find the best players it can in the context of contending again sometime soon. Pitchers appreciate the offense scoring a few runs as much as they like better defense, if they are trying to win the game.
christaylor - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 02:05 PM EDT (#206555) #
You do know that OPS+ is weight by the entire league not just the National league or the national league central.

Without a statistical case showing that Encarnacion his his 26 HR against the weaker division, you've got nothing. You cite a bunch of anecdotal evidence that means absolutely nothing. The NL has just as many stars as the AL. Using Pittsburg is no argument, what about KC? Is that an argument that Cabrera, Maurer and Morneau aren't a good hitters and ought to have their numbers discounted?

Your argument completely misses the point, I'm not arguing that the NL is the weaker league, which is what you seem to think I'm arguing. The difference in quality of the two leagues is precisely why one ought to use stats such as OPS+ if you don't think so, you need to go look up what OPS+ measures.

Encarnacion is a 3B with some power and upside. It isn't beyond belief that working with Butterfield will improve his defence. There's nothing to suggest that it is impossible for him to put up an OPS+ in the 110 range and improve his defence to close to league average working with Butterfield. HIs plus minus stats show that it isn't his range that is the problem but much of his problem over the past couple of years have been with balls hit at him. Range definitely can't be taught, but I bet his hands can be worked on (and from watching him his arm doesn't seem to be a problem).
Jim - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 02:14 PM EDT (#206556) #

Yes, you can probably develop pitchers with a bad defense.  Seems like you are making it tougher on yourself since:

A.  Giving away outs forces them to throw more pitches and leads to more pitches thrown per inning

B.  Could potentially cause them to lose confidence

C.  Might make them focus on striking hitters out which causes them to struggle

It's not anything that can probably be proven, but it seems pretty sensible to me that if you've got young pitchers it's better to actively try and help them by putting a good defense behind them. 

If EE had an .800 OPS I guess he wouldn't be a total disaster, I just don't see that happening in the AL East leaving the Great American Band Box.  With his defense I think he'd have to get to 115-120 OPS+ to truly be an average player.  Toronto plays pretty neutral so I think that is about .830.  I do get the feeling I value defense much more highly then most here, and I think that baseball in general is moving towards that direction.  Riccardi seemed to be ahead of the curve at one point in valuing defense and now they have seemed to go in the other direction.

Encarnacion will probably be here so I guess we'll find out.  I'd prefer to move him and put the money elsewhere but it's not like it's going to make a huge difference one way or the other.

 

christaylor - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 02:17 PM EDT (#206558) #
You're reasoning is specious and full of non-sequiturs, Jim. It'd be nice if you used evidence and logic instead of negative quips, but I'll bite and play this game.

"Encarnacion is not going to have a 105-110 OPS+ in the AL."

OK, Nostradamus what does your crystal ball say? Since September EE slash line is: .259/.344/.494 -- as season of that is easily in the 105-110 OPS+ range.

"Encarnacion can be had on the cheap and has upside.

Isn't it strange then that an even poorer team traded him?"

What does that even mean? Please make sense. Jason Bay was traded from a poor team to the Red Sox, does that make him a bad player? Answer: No.

"I think it's been worse. 4 years of consistently horrible metrics I guess we should throw out?"

Well, our eyes disagree. What I don't think is up for debate is that Butterfield is one of the best fielding coaches out there... I'm sure some of Scoots success has been because of Butter. Why should EE be impervious to Butter's instruction. EE has made more than a few good plays since arriving. No the metrics shouldn't be thrown out, but as I mentioned according to +/- a lot of his trouble has been with ball right at him. If he's coachable that seems like one of the most coachable aspects of playing 3B.

"He's exactly the sort of player the franchise needs

Sure, if the goal is to be in 75 win purgatory from now til eternity."

A cheap 3B for a team that has no other options in the system. Sure that spells 75 wins for eternity. Again, you're making no sense. I see that many other posters disagree with you. This team needs players with upside. EE has upside, in fact, more upside than Rolen. The fact that you can't see it, doesn't make it true that he has no upside.

"I must really be misreading the market on players who don't hit, can't field and make 4 million dollars. If he has so much upside why was he better when he was 23 then he was when he was 25? Aren't players with upside supposed to improve and not regress?"

Yes, every player follows a smooth trajectory upwards until they reach the magic number of 27. Yes, that's precisely how baseball works. Baseball players aren't human they're just statistic producing robots who work exactly like *the average data* say they should. C'mon, you must have realized how absurd that statement was when you wrote it. Take your I hate EE glasses off and get a dose of reality, please.
Jim - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 02:28 PM EDT (#206559) #

Without a statistical case showing that Encarnacion his his 26 HR against the weaker division, you've got nothing. You cite a bunch of anecdotal evidence that means absolutely nothing. The NL has just as many stars as the AL. Using Pittsburg is no argument, what about KC? Is that an argument that Cabrera, Maurer and Morneau aren't a good hitters and ought to have their numbers discounted?

Wow.  You really don't think the American League is stronger then the National League?  You really don't think that the American League East is better then the Central?

I'm not really in the mood to dig up the links that show the statistical proof that the AL is better then the NL, but it's so distinct and obvious that I can't even believe someone would argue against it. 

American League baseball is much better then National League baseball at this point in time.   You have to take that into account when projecting players between the leagues.  The unbalanced schedule makes it very important.  You can't seriously try to argue that playing 40% of your games in the NL Central wouldn't be an advantage versus playing 40% of your games against the AL East. 

Every legitimate projection model from ZIPS to PECOTA contain corrections for the level of play between the AL and NL. 

Nice leap though.  Because I said you have to discount someone's National League's numbers when they change leagues that means I don't think Mauer and Mourneau are good hitters.  That's exactly what I said. 

AWeb - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 02:36 PM EDT (#206560) #

Yes, you can probably develop pitchers with a bad defense.  Seems like you are making it tougher on yourself since:

A.  Giving away outs forces them to throw more pitches and leads to more pitches thrown per inning

More development time for them then! But more seriously, I don't dispute this will happen, just that it matters all that much in the end. 

B.  Could potentially cause them to lose confidence

So could losing a series of 2-1 games where a single bad pitch cost them the game. Trying to be "too fine" can happen either way.

C.  Might make them focus on striking hitters out which causes them to struggle

Oh no, not striking people out! Clemens, Burnett, Halladay, Stieb, Guzman, Clancy - these are the names with the most strikeouts in a single season for the Jays. I'd rather a pitcher try to strikeout batters, just to see if they can do it. If they can't do it, chances are slim that they are good enough to stick around.

It's not anything that can probably be proven, but it seems pretty sensible to me that if you've got young pitchers it's better to actively try and help them by putting a good defense behind them. 

I acknowledge that this is common wisdom, but that doesn't mean it is true. It would be quite a large study - identify similar pitchers of the same ages coming from the minors, compare how the careers went and how the defense during their formative years (first 2-3?) may have factored in. Way past anything I have time to do, but possible. I don't see anything that indicates it's been done before...but the intertubewebs are a big place.

Ducey - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 02:36 PM EDT (#206561) #

With all this talk of grass and EE's defence, I was wondering...the TV talking heads (Cambell and some old guy) were mentioning the other day that the Field Turf is slower than grass.  The Jays apprently play their fielders closer to the plate than say the Yankees because the Jays fielders know the ball will get to them slower.

If this is true, then wouldn't this a) help EE or most fielders with their defence (range, reaction), and b) be something the Jays could take advantage of or even market to players?

Maybe the "Butterfield effect" is actually related in part to the surface?

Jim - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 02:38 PM EDT (#206562) #

What does that even mean? Please make sense. Jason Bay was traded from a poor team to the Red Sox, does that make him a bad player? Answer: No.

Uh Jason Bay wasn't cheap.  If someone was cheap and had upside wouldn't the team most familiar with him value him more highly?   Cincinnati pretty clearly didn't.

Why should EE be impervious to Butter's instruction. EE has made more than a few good plays since arriving. No the metrics shouldn't be thrown out, but as I mentioned according to +/- a lot of his trouble has been with ball right at him. If he's coachable that seems like one of the most coachable aspects of playing 3B.

He looks as bad as the numbers look to me.   Sure maybe Butterfield can coach him to respectability, I wouldn't take it to the bank but the possibility exists.

A cheap 3B for a team that has no other options in the system. Sure that spells 75 wins for eternity. Again, you're making no sense. I see that many other posters disagree with you. This team needs players with upside. EE has upside, in fact, more upside than Rolen. The fact that you can't see it, doesn't make it true that he has no upside.

Rolen is an old man, of course he has more upside then EE.  The fact that you think he has upside doesn't make it any more true then me thinking that he doesn't.  Of course the team needs players with upside.  I just don't think this player has much, neither did his former employers.

Yes, every player follows a smooth trajectory upwards until they reach the magic number of 27. Yes, that's precisely how baseball works. Baseball players aren't human they're just statistic producing robots who work exactly like *the average data* say they should. C'mon, you must have realized how absurd that statement was when you wrote it. Take your I hate EE glasses off and get a dose of reality, please.

I don't hate the guy, just don't think he's an everyday third baseman in the major leagues.  Who said players need to have smooth trajectories?  You are saying he's going to be much improved next year over this year and the prior years.  I see that he hasn't improved at all the last three years, so it's a leap of faith I'm not willing to take that the fourth time around will be the magical improvement especially as he transitions to the most competitive division in baseball.

A dose of reality?  He's a player having a horrific year and by every defensive metric has been one of the worst third basemen in the game for a long time.  He hasn't improved one bit over three seasons and I'm just supposed to accept that he's going to be an average major league player next year based on nothing other then the Blue Jays have a good infield coach and he's going to be 27 years old.  All the evidence points the other way, the only thing on your side is your nebulous definition of 'upside', which another major league team who had a front row seat for many years decided wasn't there.  

 

Jim - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 02:41 PM EDT (#206563) #

Oh no, not striking people out! Clemens, Burnett, Halladay, Stieb, Guzman, Clancy - these are the names with the most strikeouts in a single season for the Jays. I'd rather a pitcher try to strikeout batters, just to see if they can do it. If they can't do it, chances are slim that they are good enough to stick around.

Well no kidding you want guys to strike out a lot of hitters if they can.  You don't want guys nibbling because they are scared of contact.  I know it's chic in baseball to just assume that all the people inside the game are wrong, but there is something to be said for common sense. 

Ryan Day - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 03:09 PM EDT (#206564) #
Interestingly, in 2005 - when they rated him the 56th-best prospect in baseball - BA said Encarnacion had the tools to be a good defender at third. Perhaps that gives one hope that Butterfield has something to work with.
whiterasta80 - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 03:10 PM EDT (#206565) #
Did anyone else check out this story?

http://www.drunkjaysfans.com/

Apparently the Jays managed to draw a "random" fan for a prize and then awarded it to someone else (who presumably wasn't random) afterwards. Unfortunately for them the person they cheated was a blogger.

Anyway its an interesting read and isn't exactly the kind of press that the Jays need right now.

Warning: contains a fair amount of profanity.
Ryan Day - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 03:12 PM EDT (#206566) #
I'm not really in the mood to dig up the links that show the statistical proof that the AL is better then the NL, but it's so distinct and obvious that I can't even believe someone would argue against it.

I don't believe anyone is arguing it. They are stating, correctly, that OPS+ is adjusted for the league. (http://www.baseball-reference.com/about/bat_glossary.shtml)
Jim - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 03:22 PM EDT (#206567) #

OPS+ isn't corrected for the level of play it was acheived against.  It in no way corrects for the huge gap between the pitching talent in the AL East versus the NL Central.  Since that is where almost half your games are played that's a pretty huge issue and forces a discount when you are projecting the new situation.

John Northey - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 04:02 PM EDT (#206568) #
A fair amount of profanity?  Wonder what it takes to be listed as a lot of profanity :)

I was at that game with my 3 daughters for their first game ever.  I regretted not buying tickets from a scalper on the way in though as the (#&*@! ticket booth lady sold me tickets in section 504 (I didn't check where the tickets were as the Jays have been drawing flies lately).  We barely could see the screen (vital when you are there with 3 girls 10 and under), the game was more of a rumour than reality, and it was packed in that section while giant open spaces around 530 were empty.  I figured the tickets were all sold or something so was surprised to find out there were under 40k sold for the game.  By the 5th we moved from the boonies to the 530's so the girls could enjoy the final few innings (great seats there for watching the Jays runs score). 

The Jays really, really, really need to improve how the stadium is run.  Back in 1996 I remember fireworks at the end of the final game of the season - none this time.  I remember seeing vendors going through the stands trying to sell hot dogs - now we have to get into long lines for $4.50 soft drinks.  The OK Blue Jays 7th inning stretch didn't push the arm movements and the like (I always enjoyed that bit and love watching the crowd do it) - my girls and the people around us must have thought I was crazy as I did it (yes, the mascot was doing it and so were others but it was very few vs what I recall).

I will be taking the girls to games next year - they did enjoy the overall experience.  However, please Jays, lets get more of the handout items, lower noise, and more fun between inning stuff.  If you want the 10 and under crew to become fans they need the ballpark to be fun, not painful.  They need the ticket booths to sell real tickets, not painful tickets or at least warn that they are painful tickets.  Yeah, yeah - let the buyer beware.
greenfrog - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 07:16 PM EDT (#206570) #
Don't look now, but Wells is ever-so-slightly salvaging his brutal year. With six games to go, he's up to 263/314/406. Now, that's certainly not great--it's not even good--but considering how poorly he hit in May, June and July, those numbers are arguably a moral victory (or a morale victory) of sorts.
Paul D - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 07:53 PM EDT (#206571) #

As far as I know, the studies looking at the difference between the AL and NL is about 3%.  This is not some huge, insurmountable difference.

Shane - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 07:57 PM EDT (#206572) #

With six games to go, he's up to 263/314/406. Now, that's certainly not great--it's not even good

I know what your saying, but that is still brutal. 314/406? If he was a gold glove shortstop or something maybe that would be tollerable, but bleck! That's some major suck.

Jim - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 08:00 PM EDT (#206573) #
As far as I know, the studies looking at the difference between the AL and NL is about 3%.

I've seen numbers similar to that.  So if the difference between the leagues is 3%, what the difference between the best division in one league and the worst division in the other league?  5 or 6%?  Ignore that at your own peril.  You'd have to be 6% better year over year to just get back to the same numbers.
bball12 - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 08:04 PM EDT (#206574) #
Greenfrog,

Sort of like putting lipstick on a pig.

From RISP - to OPS - and everything else in between - there is really nothing anyone can say to make it even remotely palatable. 

$32,000 per  at bat.

There is nothing you can do - and nowhere for him to go - so - all any fan can do is hope that next year he plays a whole lot better.





greenfrog - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 08:15 PM EDT (#206575) #
As I mentioned, his numbers aren't good. But if he can eke his way back to 270/330/450 over the next couple of years, maybe the Jays can simply park him somewhere in the outfield and concentrate on other, more tractable problems.
Alex Obal - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 08:39 PM EDT (#206576) #
There is nothing you can do - and nowhere for him to go -

You could increase Wells' salary per AB.
Paul D - Monday, September 28 2009 @ 09:47 PM EDT (#206578) #
I've seen numbers similar to that.  So if the difference between the leagues is 3%, what the difference between the best division in one league and the worst division in the other league?  5 or 6%?  Ignore that at your own peril.

Even with the unbalanced schedule there's no way it's anywhere near that large.   That would be a huge difference.  (And I know that you'll respond that the difference is huge, and it may be bigger than the league difference, although I'm not sure I buy that, but it's not 6% different)
TamRa - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 03:43 AM EDT (#206579) #
So the defensive metrics show how he's done as a Jay and if there's been any improvement? Or even better month-by-month?

I'm not a huge defender of Eddie but I'm not gonna hate on him either. I think the ideal situation would see us bring in Figgins with the idea of playing him in LF but open to the idea of shifting him to 3B and EE to DH if Eddie doesn't get his defensive act together.

That would shift Lind back to LF but it's better to have poor D in left than at third.

Of course, Figgins is supposedly one of the most coveted guys out there so you might have to overpay to execute that plan.


Jim - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 09:27 AM EDT (#206580) #

Fangraphs shows this as EE's worst defensive year by UZR.  I don't see anywhere it breaks out the number Reds vs. Blue Jays.

I respectably disagree on the difference between the AL East and NL Central.  I think 5-6% is being conservative.

Based on today's rosters:

Yankees:Pirates  Pirates:Durham Bulls

If the Yankees and Pirates played 162 games, the Yankees would go something like 115-47.  I think the Bulls would be better then 47-115 against Pittsburgh.

 

Jim - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 09:37 AM EDT (#206581) #

I think everyone can agree that the Jays are considerably better then the Pirates or Reds or Astros.  The Jays are 15-37 (.288) against NY/Bos/Tampa.  Jays are 5-9 (.357) when Halladay starts against those teams and 10-28 (.263) when he doesn't. 

The Yankees, Red Sox and Rays would demolish the NL Central.  The Yankees would win 110, Red Sox 105, Rays 100.  The Yankees have played (.662) baseball against everyone but the Red Sox (.500).   That's 107 win pace in the AL outside of the other superpower.

 

Mike Green - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 11:29 AM EDT (#206582) #
If there is a 3% difference in the leagues this year, I would expect that there is at least a 6% difference between the best division (the AL East) and the worst (the NL Central).  This does not necessarily mean that the difference is equally apportioned among offence and defence. 
ayjackson - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 12:15 PM EDT (#206586) #
Does anybody else strongly suspect that "Jim" is really Shea Hillenbrand?
Ryan Day - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 01:16 PM EDT (#206587) #
Rate it how you will, but two of the top 5 pitching teams in the NL (Cubs & Cards) are in the Central. Same thing last year (Cubs & Brewers),

There's not much doubt the AL East is better than the NL Central, but at a certain point you're just splitting hairs - how much do you have to adjust the Yankees' numbers because they don't have to face the Yankees? Encarnacion's likely to be an average-ish hitter, with enough upside to be better than that. Adding or subtracting percentage points just seems silly.

Mick Doherty - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 01:41 PM EDT (#206588) #

There is nothing you can do - and nowhere for him to go -

You could increase Wells' salary per AB.

Alex, took me a sec to realize what you were saying, but dude, that's sheer genius (not necessarily the plan -- the way you worded it!)

Chuck - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 02:19 PM EDT (#206589) #
Is it only the stars that are bright (clap, clap, clap) deep in the heart of Texas?
LouisvilleJayFan - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 02:44 PM EDT (#206590) #
So ZERO Auburn Doubledays made the Top 20 prospects of the NY-PENN league, but FOUR from the Yankees and FOUR from the Red Sox teams made the list. Grrrrrrrrrrr...is the system really that bad that they're are 20 guys + that scouts and baseball people would take in that league over any ONE of the Jays kids? I know Ochinko was a college player who dominated but the fact that he can catch has to give him some value.
ayjackson - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 04:33 PM EDT (#206591) #

Aaron Fitt did have good things to say about the Doubledays' prospects in the chat.  He said that Wellington Ramirez was #21, based on feedback from league managers and scouts (though he was less enthusiastic, given 4 years in the DSL).  He commented on Goins, Schimpf (good bats, regardless of size), Gomes (good defender, pop should come) and Ochinko (might move to 1B).

Age shouldn't have been too much of a concern as the majority of the top 20 were 20-22 years old.

Chuck - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 05:45 PM EDT (#206592) #

Maybe the team that signs McDonald to play LF can also sign Millar to play 3B. He'll be starting there tonight while Ruiz sits and watches, wondering what he has to do get playing time in September.

Shane - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 05:54 PM EDT (#206593) #

Millar keeps the clubhouse aka 'the ship' from sinking. Ruiz can't do that.

Thomas - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 06:05 PM EDT (#206594) #
I have no idea how passably Millar can play 3B (probably not very), but that is one thing that he's legitimately better, and probably noticeably better, than Ruiz at.
Ryan Day - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 06:25 PM EDT (#206595) #
Of course, Bautista's a perfectly adequate third baseman - at least compared to Millar, who hasn't played the position since 2002. But he's out in right.

You'd think with Inglett and Scutaro hurt, they might have brough up someone else who can fill in around the infield (Sanchez, maybe Campbell or Emaus?). But apparently the answer is to play Millar at third.

smcs - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 06:29 PM EDT (#206596) #

How bout some good news? The Sun is reporting that Dustin McGowan made 50 throws from 125 feet yesterday and reported no discomfort in his shoulder.

Also, I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere else, but Canada won the Bronze medal, their best finish ever, in the 2009 Baseball World Cup, with a final record of 12-3, with their loses coming against the US and Cuba (Gold and Silver medal winners) and an extra innings loss to Australia.  Trystan Magnuson won the tournament award as the best reliever and Angel Sanchez (playing for Puerto Rico) was named the most outstanding defensive player.

Chuck - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 06:30 PM EDT (#206597) #
I have no idea how passably Millar can play 3B (probably not very), but that is one thing that he's legitimately better, and probably noticeably better, than Ruiz at.

I'm sure you know that I wasn't suggesting that Ruiz should be playing 3B. Bautista could play 3B, Snider RF, Lind LF and Ruiz DH.
Ron - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 07:23 PM EDT (#206598) #
It looks like the Jays are trying to help Kevin Millar get another $50,000 bonus for 250 AB's. The Jays will likely pay Millar $100,000 in bonus money this
season. I only wish they were this charitable when it comes to bonus money for draft picks such as Paxton and Eliopoulos.

AWeb - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 07:46 PM EDT (#206599) #
I love watching the at bats this series for the Jays. They seem to have finally decided, en masse, that hitting long homeruns is the best thing to try for. It reeks of "screw it, what do we have to lose" at the end of the year, but heck, these HRs still count, and still sow seeds of doubt into the Red Sox fanbase (which is also fun). 40 HR this month is pretty impressive for this team - with the current cast of characters, it's the only way to go, since long rallies are less likely with Scutaro out.
Thomas - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 08:37 PM EDT (#206600) #
I'm sure you know that I wasn't suggesting that Ruiz should be playing 3B. Bautista could play 3B, Snider RF, Lind LF and Ruiz DH.

Lind, as far as I'm aware, still can't play the field because of nagging injuries. That's the reason Bautista's starting every game in the outfield and Ruiz isn't playing (although he should be playing first base against lefties instead of Millar).

Magpie - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 11:00 PM EDT (#206601) #
When earlier in your managerial career you started a guy who hadn't played an inning at the position for several years at third base in the World Series.... Kevin Millar in a meaningless September game doesn't seem such a big deal.
bball12 - Tuesday, September 29 2009 @ 11:30 PM EDT (#206602) #
I agree with Magpie - it really makes no difference at this point.

You could have Bozo the Clown as the starting pitcher tomorrow - and it wouldnt matter at all. It might actually be more fun than suffering through yet another routine loss.

All teams - at all levels - lost more games than they won. Disgusting. No excuses can justify it.

For winners - the only thing that matters is - you guessed it - WINNING.

Hype and Potential dont count. They may fill up media space - but Hype and Potential dont win games.

Only Performance does.

We can only hope that at some point - the Blue Jays will grasp this simple concept.

Until then - be prepared for alot more losing and whining.

Chuck - Wednesday, September 30 2009 @ 09:49 AM EDT (#206613) #
Kevin Millar in a meaningless September game doesn't seem such a big deal

That Millar is still on the roster at all is offensive to me. That he continues to play, often at the expense of others who warrant the playing time, is, to me, a little FU from the organization to the fans.

Millar is not a young player who is struggling as he learns the game. He is not a longterm Jay being given playing time as a swan song. He was signed as roster filler and has performed poorly. Because he's a barrell of monkeys in the clubhouse he gets a pass? Blech.
Mike Green - Wednesday, September 30 2009 @ 09:59 AM EDT (#206615) #
I am with Chuck.  Complaining about the tough competition in the AL East and the modest team budget, while playing the stupid old boy network rules, just doesn't cut it for me. 
Jim - Wednesday, September 30 2009 @ 10:14 AM EDT (#206616) #
The most annoying thing about Millar is paying him plate appearance bonuses when there wasn't money around to pay the draft picks.
Ryan Day - Wednesday, September 30 2009 @ 10:42 AM EDT (#206617) #
I don't believe the issue was that there wasn't enough money to pay draft picks. It was that ownership didn't allocate enough money to the draft and/or didn't want to go too much over slot.

Millar and the draft are unrelated problems.

John Northey - Wednesday, September 30 2009 @ 11:23 AM EDT (#206621) #
Also can't help but wonder if Cito is sending a message upstairs - give me crap with bonuses and I'll let him get those bonuses.  I understand giving Millar a final swan song in Boston, but this weekend he should be glued to the bench except perhaps for a final AB in the final game. 

Of course, Ruiz is who he is too - a slugging AAAA guy who is a pure DH.  Might be useful as a platoon partner in 2010 if Lind isn't the DH or Lind goes to 1B when Overbay sits vs LHP.  Cito and crew know who he is and what he can do at this point I'd suspect.  Outside of Ruiz there really isn't anyone else who needs playing time.  Snider is everyday (more or less, misses some LHP), Phillips should get more time as a catcher imo, Encarnacion has been everyday when healthy and that covers everyone on the roster who is a hitter who is under 27.  So of the kids only Phillips really should be out there more for experience but his main purpose is to be an emergency catcher this September.  I suspect Barajas is getting lots of time to try to up his raw stats and make him more attractive to other teams as a free agent (thus getting a draft pick or two).  4 hits for 100, 1 HR for 20, 1 walk for 20 (OK, that is just sad).

Hmm... milestones...
Snider: 1 HR from 10
Ruiz & Millar: 3 HR from 10
Barajas: 4 RBI from 75
Hill: 10 hits from 200, 4 K's shy of 100
Lind: 7 runs to reach 100
Overbay: 17 PA from 502 (to qualify for leaderboards)
Millar & Bautista: 1 DP from 10, Overbay is 2 away which if all made it would give us 8 guys in double digits.

Pitching...
Tallet: 1 1/3 IP from 162

That's about it for achievable goals of interest.  Richmond is 2 wins from 10 but won't get 2 more starts I suspect.  Frasor is very close (2 K's) from a K an inning.  Richmond just 2 K's from a 2-1 ratio of K's to BB's.  Yeah, I'm stretching here.
Jim - Wednesday, September 30 2009 @ 12:01 PM EDT (#206625) #

I don't believe the issue was that there wasn't enough money to pay draft picks. It was that ownership didn't allocate enough money to the draft and/or didn't want to go too much over slot.

It's the exact same thing.  Fine, the annoying thing about Millar is that he's employed by an organziation who is willing to pay playing time bonus money to a player who doesn't deserve any playing time  while in the same season either cutting back their draft budget between draft day and the signing deadline or changing their mind about going over slot after picking players they knew they would have to go over slot to sign.

Being willing as an organization to pay Millar bonus money is an indictment of every person in the organization who is involved in decision making.  Does Millar have sort of Jedi mindtrick that makes Cito and JP want to hand him a sack of cash on his way out the door?  Does a 75 win team really need to reward the clubhouse leaders that led them to such a lofty position?

How about avoiding the plate appearances just out of respect for the 500 fans who care enough to even notice something this ridiculous situation.

Magpie - Wednesday, September 30 2009 @ 10:04 PM EDT (#206655) #
What has unexpectedly become a problem is the team's failure to add very many players to the roster after September 1. Phillips and Inglett brought them up to 15 position players, or not quite as many as Earl Weaver normally carried all year long. I don't remember anyone making much of an issue of it at the time, beyond the desire of some people to see Brian Dopirak (who wouldn't be of much use in this particular pickle, anyway.)

Granted, you don't expect three infielders to go down. But right now, with Lind, Scutaro, Inglett, and Encarnacion all hurting, the only guys left are the backup catchers. So if you want nail Millar to the bench this weekend and play Bautista at 3b, you're going to end up with Kyle Phillips in the outfield. Unless you want to play him at third (he's done it in the minors.)

There are also a few guys in that bullpen that I wouldn't having a look at in the field. I don't know that they have any future as pitchers.
Jim - Wednesday, September 30 2009 @ 11:56 PM EDT (#206660) #
I don't know if I've seen anything quite like this September.  Baldelli playing third tonight?  MLB needs to direct their franchises that unless they want to break out Spring Training ticket pricing they need to treat the games as actual contests. 

It's beyond ridiculous that Dusty Brown pitched tonight.  I'm not sure what is worse, running out of infielders or running out of pitchers after the rosters expand. 

I've watched a lot of baseball this month and I understand why people have migrated to football.  The sentiment seems to have taken hold in baseball that these games don't matter and they are being treated as such. 

Just look at the length of the games.  Tampa and Baltimore played in 2:25 last night... even though Joe Madden made SIX pitching changes.  How can anyone in Tampa possibly complain that only 10,000 people showed up.  Why would anyone go through the trouble of going to a game on a Tuesday night when the players don't even want to be there. 






James W - Thursday, October 01 2009 @ 08:24 AM EDT (#206662) #

Correct me if I'm wrong, but did you just complain that the Tampa-Baltimore game was too short?  Granted, you'll get your wish in the playoffs when Papelbon takes 2 minutes and 47 seconds between every pitch.

Baseball has always had meaningless games in September.  Their issue this year is that 15 of the 16 games are now meaningless. 

Thomas - Thursday, October 01 2009 @ 09:03 AM EDT (#206665) #
I'm with Jim that the idea that Millar will get bonuses when the Jays failed to sign three of their top four draft picks is ridiculous.

As Magpie mentioned, Phillips has played third in the minors and I understand why Millar got one more start in Boston (if he's going to be on the team, I don't mind them giving him his final start in the city where he's a fan favourite...but he shouldn't have got as many starts as he did prior to that), but Phillips should get any start at 3B in Baltimore that Encarnacion is injured for.
MatO - Thursday, October 01 2009 @ 09:13 AM EDT (#206666) #
There's no hidden agenda with Millar.  It's just Cito being Cito.
Jim - Thursday, October 01 2009 @ 09:21 AM EDT (#206668) #

Correct me if I'm wrong, but did you just complain that the Tampa-Baltimore game was too short?

I'm all for well played crisp baseball.  When you have 7 pitching changes in a game total and play it that quickly, that isn't crisp baseball.  That is just batters giving away plate appearances.

There always has been meaningless baseball in September, it just wasn't flaunted so obviously by the teams and managers.  You are a major league baseball team with the ability to put 40 men on your roster.  You are charging full freight, you should field a lineup within reason (for example, no Baldelli and Millar playing third) and not blow off the game to the point where there are more pitching changes then pitches taken.  Letting a good soldier like JMac play the outfield to build value in his mind is one thing, to let your third catcher toss meatballs when your franchise charges huge dollars for their tickets is another.

September has turned into March.  Certainly a lack of good pennant races is effecting interest, but 'professionals' that can't even pretend to go through the motions are a sham. 

Mike Green - Thursday, October 01 2009 @ 09:22 AM EDT (#206669) #
True.  And the decision to have him on the roster at this point is just JP being JP.
zeppelinkm - Thursday, October 01 2009 @ 10:06 AM EDT (#206675) #
What about some sort of reverse draft order within a set tier system, to try and motivate teams to play hard until the end.

Like, all the draft picks are grouped into categories.

Tier A - picks 1 -5
Tier B - picks 6 -10
Tier C - picks 11-15
Tier D - picks 16-20
Tier E - picks 21-25
Tier F - picks 26 -30

But instead of the 30th place team getting the 1st pick, the 26th team would get the first pick (and 27th ranked team would get the 2nd pick, so the worst team gets the 5th overall pick). It would give an incentive to all the teams to play as hard as possible for all their games.

I'm not even sure if I like this idea... Jim just got me thinking about the problem of playing out the string.

MatO - Thursday, October 01 2009 @ 10:11 AM EDT (#206676) #
True.  And the decision to have him on the roster at this point is just JP being JP.     True enough assuming Cito has no input in it.  To paraphrase Pat Burns (ex hockey coach): If you want to play the rookies, then make sure there are no veterans around.
Jim - Thursday, October 01 2009 @ 11:24 AM EDT (#206678) #

It's going to be an interesting off season.  It feels as though there are a pretty large number of franchises who are going to look at their attendance, look at the economy and decide to get even more conservative. 

Some of the teams that have the most empty stadiums are the most troubling: 

Cincinnati is drawing flies and they spent their budget room on Rolen already.  They have some good young arms that all seem hurt and are so far away from being competitive even in that division it's hard to believe. 

Washington was a terrible idea in the first place and it's been even worse then you could expect.  Strasburg will at least put some people in the stadium next April but if you just look at their television ratings it's hard to think that short of being a perenial World Series contender they are ever going to have any interest.  Angelos is crazy, but he wasn't totally wrong about the Baltimore/Washington situation. 

Cleveland plays their home games in front of what looks to be a couple of thousand people on good nights.  They are lucky to be in a division where a quick turnaround is possible, but unless they find a rotation it is hard to believe they fell so far so fast from the ALCS only 2 years ago. 

You can start to see some promise on the field in Baltimore, but their fan base is just disgusted with another late season disaster.  I love teams that build from within, but if they don't hit on those starters they will just continue to give up so many runs that they will won't be competitive before it's time to pay Jones & Weiters - assuming that they even continue to blossom into stars. 

My guess is that these teams pull an Anti-Detroit and pull back spending and budgets which will only make it harder to sell tickets.  If you don't sell tickets in the offseason and get off to a slow start it's just another season of the same cycle.

I started to feel like things had gotten out of hand between the haves and the have nots in baseball around 2000, but was encouraged by the next half dozen seasons or so.  It seems more dire now then ever though.  The high spending teams have gained such a huge advantage that there are about a dozen franchises that have started to atrophy and it's hard to really see how they can do anything other then try and catch lightning in a bottle.

This is just a guess, but I have a feeling that the television ratings for the playoffs are going to be shockingly bad.  Even here in the Northeast US people are starting to get Red Sox-Yankees fatigue. 

Brian W - Thursday, October 01 2009 @ 12:10 PM EDT (#206683) #
The biggest problem with zeppelinkm's draft proposal is that it would probably lead to more teams trying to drop games.  Imagine if you are sitting 25th overall.  If I'm understanding this proposal correctly you'd be drafting 10th.  If you could drop one spot in the standings to 26th you'd jump all the way to the first overall pick which is a massive incentive.  Similarly the team in 26th will not want to jeopardize their position in the last tier by winning games when they know that they can only move out of the top 5 picks by winning games. 

Yes you'd give an incentive to the bottom four teams to try to win games but I'm not sure anybody is accusing Washington of sucking intentionally to begin with.  They just don't have enough talent to win games.
John Northey - Thursday, October 01 2009 @ 12:17 PM EDT (#206684) #
If you take it as a given that many teams will be cutting payroll then there will be amazing bargains this winter.  The Yankees will grab whoever they want, as will the Red Sox as their budgets never seem to be hurting.  However, who else is in that good of shape to add contracts?

3 million attendance club - aka should spend cash as they have it
AL: Yankees, Angels with Boston reaching it on Sunday most likely (baring a rainout).
NL: Dodgers, Phillies, Cardinals, Cubs, Mets, Brewers (yes, the Milwaukee Brewers).  SF will come up just short.

2 million - aka spending some cash might help fill the place
AL: Detroit, White Sox, Minnesota, Texas, Seattle
NL: SF, Colorado, Houston, Atlanta, Arizona

Under 2 million - aka 'oh crap'
AL: Jays, Baltimore, KC, Tampa (!), Cleveland
NL: San Diego, Washington (lost the new park smell, got the loser smell instead), Cincinnati

Under 20k per game - aka Montreal bound
AL: Oakland (under 20k per game)
NL: Pittsburgh, Florida

Interesting to see just how bad fan support they have in Tampa (and in the state of Florida generally).  I mean, come on, you have a young exciting team that made the World Series last year and you still don't get 2 million fans in there?  Sheesh.  Jays do that and you'd see 3 million+ very quickly.
Shane - Thursday, October 01 2009 @ 12:29 PM EDT (#206685) #

There's no hidden agenda with Millar. 

Exaclty. Cito knows what he's doing. It's obvious. The more games Millar was in the line-up, the more loses pile-up, the higher the draftpick the Jays recieve in 2010. Cito has been looking longterm after all. Unfortunately, Paplebon hit and injured Lind and Ruiz has snuck back into the line-up. Again, revealing the sham, I mean, plan.

Mike Green - Thursday, October 01 2009 @ 01:27 PM EDT (#206686) #
baring a rainout

It is a fine line between streaking and enjoying a free shower at Fenway.
christaylor - Thursday, October 01 2009 @ 02:08 PM EDT (#206689) #
On draft order - while it doesn't quite solve the problem teams tanking, I'm really in favour of a draft lottery for the bottom N teams. The weighting of the draft could produce very little incentive for not trying to win the last few games, especially if the number of "balls" between the 20th and the 30th place teams isn't appreciably different.

That said, I believe the draft has bigger problems, those of a) the draft ought to be world-wide and start at 19 and b) the slotting system should be a hard system (with no loop holes such as having the player play in the independent leagues for a year). c) draft picks ought to be able to be traded, which is a strange rule in baseball, they are an asset that a team has and given the (over?) valuation of prospects recently, trading draft picks could be a way for bad teams to get better (especially if your team is the Royal/Pirates who seem not to be able to draft ML players to save their lives). Draft picks are almost certain to be overvalued and if/when they are trade-able the first team that figures out dealing them for young talent will have it made. Imagine the analog of the Kessel deal; that'd be an absolute steal; 23 year old proven player for two draft picks. Or even a player like Cecil for two draft picks. That said, I think prospects are over-valued and if JP (or the next GM) was smart he/she would turn the young arms of the Jays into position players (particularly SS and C) at the first opportunity.

Luckily it looks like in the next round of collective bargaining the issues of hard slotting and draft pick trading might be address (as the players association probably won't strike over the rights of people who aren't currently members). Unfortunately the world-wide draft might be harder to implement. I think it ridiculous that teams are throwing millions at 16 year old latin talent or millions to Japanese teams just for the rights to talk to a player (teams seem gun-shy on this in recent years given the failure of Igawa but I'm sure Darvish will generate DiceK like insanity).
Magpie - Thursday, October 01 2009 @ 05:36 PM EDT (#206701) #
Phillips should get any start at 3B in Baltimore that Encarnacion is injured for.

You remember who's managing the Blue Jays, right? So it probably won't be Phillips. Gaston and young players... he likes them to succeed. He likes to see them in the lineup playing well. He doesn't want to bench them. If they're having trouble, if they can't cope, he'd rather have them in the minors playing (Delgado to Snider) than sitting on the bench, waiting their turn, and feeling inadequate. (It's still astounding to me that Shawn Green wasn't sent to the minors, say in June 1996. Or May 1997.)

And while no manager ever wants to put a player into a position where he's got a chance to make a fool of himself, Gaston would much rather ask that of a veteran than a young player. He will not have seen Kyle Phillips play 3b this year, but someone will have told him that he played third... like a catcher, and made 10 errors in 38 games.
Thomas - Thursday, October 01 2009 @ 11:28 PM EDT (#206721) #
You remember who's managing the Blue Jays, right?

I do, and I'm in the middle of the other thread defending him against unwarranted criticism. I agree that Phillips won't get the starts at 3B, but I still believe he should.

Actually, a more accurate description is that I want to know how well or poorly Phillips can handle third. If the Jays feel confident on their own internal scouting reports (or feel like one game in Baltimore won't give them much of an idea) that's fine, but I want to know if, should Phillips make the roster next year, the team can count on him as a backup/emergency 3B or is he a catcher in the same way John McDonald's a catcher?

I'm sure Phillips isn't very good at 3B, but is he not very good but tolerable in certain situations or not very good as in an absolute trainwreck.

zeppelinkm - Friday, October 02 2009 @ 09:15 AM EDT (#206727) #
Ahh yes, thanks for pointing out the obvious flaw in the system Brian. I knew I wasn't thinking of all the angles. Was just kind of tunnel visioned on how to get the weaker teams to play hard down the stretch. Wonder if anything can be done...



Magpie - Friday, October 02 2009 @ 05:49 PM EDT (#206781) #
Actually, a more accurate description is that I want to know how well or poorly Phillips can handle third.

Reports on his defense (from Gerry) earlier this year used the phrase "defensively challenged" wherever you put him.
Ryan Day - Friday, October 02 2009 @ 06:35 PM EDT (#206789) #
Phillips may be defensively dubious, but it's not like Cito put Millar at third because he's particularly good. Millar hasn't played third since 2002, and the most games he's ever played there is 34 - and that was in AA. If he was a good defensive third baseman, I might be slightly more inclined to overlook his utterly dismal hitting.

At least Phillips could maybe be a contributor off the bench next year, while Millar will be lucky to be playing pro ball.
Joe Posnanski Doesn't Get JP | 124 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.