That's below in my world. Not sure why you cats aren't reversing the sort order in these threads! These long threads must be insane to navigate otherwise. Scroll, scroll, scroll, scroll...

Which is entirely their prerogative. Just as it would be my prerogative to pay them back with a corresponding marginal level of interest and product consumption.

Their bean counters will surely engage in game theory to find the happy spot for maximal returns. I don't pretend for a minute to be any more skilled at this than they are, but it should be at least a little instructive to look back at what happened after the team's two World Series seasons. Yes, the Skydome was new and that played a role in packed houses (remember when you couldn't even get a decent ticket to a regular season game?), and certainly Blue Jay success was new, but it didn't take long for attendance to drop from 50K to 30K, and then into 20s for a good long slog. Toronto is a fickle baseball city and not one that treats mediocrity with enthusiasm.

All of this is to say that I don't think they can simply bank on the city's unconditional love, at least not indefinitely. I think next year is a free one. The fans will come out based on the success of the last two seasons. But if they field a middling team in 2018, they might be courting trouble.

An unknown in all this, and a huge caveat to my blathering, is that we are now a generation removed from the World Series. Maybe this new generation is a different, more forgiving animal. I don't know. I do know that I saw lots and lots of newbie fans at games last summer, not surprising given the 40K turnouts. Whether they will be the first to jump ship, I don't know. But maybe they are on the cusp of becoming lifelong fans and will show patience with their new favourite team.

This may well be true, but there's little evidence thus far. If we assume Bautista (b. 1980) is not coming back, then he and Encarnacion (b. 1983) will be replaced by Pearce (b. 1983) and Morales (b. 1983).

So a little younger and little better defensively. I don't know that the two new guys are collectively faster than the two departed. Morales is slow like a Molina.

True enough. But punting offense in both outfield corners can't possibly be the game plan. Some Bruce-like lunk will surely be called in to serve as a statue in one of the corners.

Unrelated to the positon players, one thing to stay cognizant of is the luck the team had in 2016 with respect to starting pitcher health. The Plan A starters got 160 of the team's 162 starts. Hutchison's 2 starts were the sum and whole of the demands placed on Plan B starters. This type of Plan A/Plan B workload split is not likely to be repeated.

Still, his career OPS is below 600 and that could be his undoing. If the Jays cut him loose he'll land somewhere quickly.

As a loose, philosophical strategy, sure. this is true. Teams want top value for the dollar. But as a literal statement, I don't entirely accept it.

I have argued many times that I don't believe WAR to be linear. That is to say, each incremental WAR a given player can provide is worth more than the WAR before it. So even if FanGraphs places the values of 1 WAR at $8M (or whatever), no organization is chasing down 1-WAR players at that rate, or anything close. They know that 1-WAR players can be had for peanuts. Those aren't the players that are the difference-makers, unless you are plugging some serious holes.

My position is that for a given player, WAR #2 is worth more than WAR #1, WAR #3 more than WAR #2 etc. You find a 5-WAR player and I would argue that his valuation should be measured in increasingly valuable single WARs that make up his 5. I'm not entirely sure what the numbers should be for each successive WAR, but I believe in this type of model where valuation is concerned.

A team that strictly looks to optimize WAR/$ would look to win 72 games on a $50M payroll.

A team that strictly looks to optimize WAR/$ would look to win 72 games on a $50M payroll.

Agreed. As a business, that's probably great ROI. As a baseball fan, I'd rather take the Dodgers' or Yankees-of-old irrational, non-WAR-maximing spending any day over "$125 optimally spent and $40M saved" after back-to-back ALCS appearances.. In a total rebuild year, that makes sense.

On the other hand, I have to admit, I'm glad this team isn't run like the Leafs of old, where EVERY free agent HAD to be signed/re-signed, and management ALWAYS blinked. Contracts like Clarkson, resigning Lupul, for more $$ than prudent, trades where it seemed an extra pick or two were always thrown in, because the other side knew the fans were rabid and management WOULD cave.. The Leafs management of old would have given Bautista his $150M..

I floated this once before: Is it a lock that another team would have signed him to a contract meeting his higher-than-QO salary demands, thereby giving the Jays that draft pick? I can envision a scenario where Bautista twists in the wind until June.

Ego, pride, call it what you will. I could see teams deciding to lowball him given the number of, admittedly lesser, RH power bats on the market. And for Bautista to take 12M, after turning down 17M, and a year after figuring he was worth 5/150, might have been too big a pill to swallow.

But of course I'm just guessing. All we know about the man is based on observations from afar, and untold numbers of assumptions.

Based on what? What Bautista's agent told him?