Why do I get the feeling that Batista will have his one career year this year, and it won't be in a Blue Jay uniform. I think his one aberration will make sense in his upcoming contract year. After all, this guy has the stuff and flashes dominance from time to time. Why do I get bogged down and start to feel guilty about demanding a Batista trade...

I'm pretty sure the Yankees were after Clemens at the end of '96. I'm not sure if they were after Randy Myers at the end of '97.

Oh, yea, it's got to be metallica. Dude looks electric. Or how bout go all out like 'Major League' and have them play "Wild Thing".

Ryan's contract might have a repercussions on Billy Wagner's negotiations with Philadelphia and the New York Mets. Wagner earned $33 million over four years in a contract he agreed to with Houston before the 2002 season.

The New York Mets have offered just over $30 million for three years, a deal that contains a 2009 option that could raise the value to $40 million. The Phillies also are trying to re-sign him.

Ryan's era is well over 2 and his whip is over 1. He's had more seasons in his career when his era was significantly over 4 than he has had seasons under 3. He's had one season as a closer. The sole advantage he has over Wagner is his age. I think BJ Ryan *could* be a great closer, but he isn't one yet.

It's true that Ryan's had more bad seasons than good seasons, but it's also misleading to put it that way.

Ryan, age 23 - 26: 4.66 ERA, 1 HR per 9, 5.5 walks per 9, 9.3 Ks per 9

Ryan, age 27 - 29: 2.60 ERA, .4 HR per 9, 3.8 walks per 9, 12.3 Ks per 9.

You can say that he's been a bad reliever for half his career, but you can also say that he's improved every aspect of his game over the past three years.

Despite its reputation, Camden has actually been a pitcher's park in 9 of the last 10 seasons.

Jays Close to Signing Marquee Closer

Sounds like it's not quite done yet, and until I see him at a press conference, I'm afraid of counting my Blue Jays before they hatch.

And I don't mean to. My point is that if the Jays had wanted to look in-house for a closer, they had someone on hand who would've done a better job than Batista and would've been at least league-average in closing out games, allowing that $9M/Yr to be invested elsewhere. These aren't the 1984 Jays, for whom the lack of a closer was a festering psychological wound; getting someone to slam the door with authority in the ninth wasn't, to my mind, the top priority. That's all I'm saying.

Ryan is very obviously an excellent addition to the club, not only because he promises to make the 9th inning close to automatic, but because he frees up Batista for other work and (I think, anyway) assures Burnett that he'd easily hit 15 wins as a Blue Jay. And it's quite likely that JP decided there were no bats on the market he could realisically land, even by paying top dollar. If that's JP's strategy, then it's a pretty good one and I respect it. But this signing can't be judged in its entirety on its own; we need to see how it fits in with the overall off-season activity before deciding if it was the right approach.

JPR: Ken, I wanna ask you some questions. What rating did you give our bullpen going into last season?
KR (sheepishly): Oh, uh, a very bad one.
JPR: And how would you rate them now that the season is over?
KR: I'd give them a B+.
JPR (expecting even a better rating): Well, I'll take that.

I took a lot more grief than that for the B+ grade I gave out. :-)

Five years is probably two years longer than you want with a pitcher, any pitcher, but if it's the difference between signing Ryan and not signing him, well, you have to take chances sometimes. Plus, he's relatively young - at the end of the five year contract he'll be the same age as Billy Wagner is today and he's going to get at least 3 years, and probably 4 now. I'm sure the Jays did their homework to feel comfortable with Ryan as their closer at 34.

As pointed out above, the top closers are getting $10 million/year and there's no reason to believe that's going to come down. If $47 million is accurate the contract may be structured something like $8.5, $9.0, $9.5, $10, $10 so the Jays would be paying a little less than the top closers are getting. (And don't you think that Billy Wagner and his agent love this move? One, the Mets and Phillies don't have Ryan as a fallback option which increases his leverage - he'll come in at a minimum of 4 for $40 now.)

The Jays needed to consolidate their roster and Ryan helps them do that. Frasor and/or Speier may have been able to do an adequate job of closing at a fraction of Ryan's contract, but it's about putting the best 25 out on the field, not the most economical 25. BJ Ryan is certainly a lot better than the 12th man on the pitching staff and clearly upgrades the team. Signing Ryan only is a bad move if it prevents the team from making other moves to improve.

However, without trading anyone on the current roster away I believe the Jays still will have at about $15-17 million of room to add to the payroll for next year.

With this signing I think there's no question that the Jays will be making a trade of at least one of their pitchers. Batista is the most obvious candidate as his salary would free up money for the Jays to use on the lineup and there's apparently been some interest in him since he could start. However, I wouldn't rule out the Jays trading Chulk, who had an excellent season despite a low K rate, or Speier, who despite being the Jays best reliever the last several months of the season never seemed to fully gain the trust of Gibbons. Good relievers are in high demand, as the signing of Eyre and Howry show, so the Jays should have no problems moving a reliever or two for good value.

It's often said that a closer is an unnecessary piece for a team until they're ready to contend. Well, I think the Jays with this signing just announced to the other 29 teams that they're ready to contend.

A closer comp might be the Mark Davis signing by the Royals after '89. (Though that doesn't mean Ryan is going to follow the same path.)

Well, here's what the Star said on November 15: The one night stopover made in Toronto yesterday by Baltimore Orioles reliever B.J. Ryan will likely be as close as he gets to playing baseball in this city.

The Toronto Star getting something wrong does not surprise me. Here's what Jeff Blair said the very next day:

Ryan has also told friends that he is impressed with the Blue Jays and the city of Toronto and that he believes the visit to Toronto last week went surprisingly well.

There you go.

Wait a second...on Tuesday, November 15, Ryan's visit was "yesterday" but on Wednesday, November 16 it was "last week"? That's just confusing.

Here are Dan Szymborski's ZiPS projections for Ryan:

2006 ZiPS Projection - B.J. Ryan
-----------------------------------------------
 W   L   G  GS   IP    H   ER  HR  BB  SO   ERA
-----------------------------------------------
 6   1  34   0   74   52   23   4  29 105  2.80

Who said anything about free agency?

This move has eliminated that possibility because the Jays no longer have the resources to acquire and pay for those bats, unless you're of the opinion that Kevin Mench is a big bat.

Under what scenario do you see the Jays being able to acquire two 12-15 million dollar quality bats with the cash and player resources they have at their disposal?

Anything is available in baseball if you're willing to pay the price.

I heard a discussion on the FAN about this once. I think they were talking to some agent. The guy said that if you get good advice, and all major-league pro athletes can afford good advice, it's easy to set things up so that playing in Canada is tax-neutral compared to playing in the States. It might be a little more of a hassle, but it's the kind of hassle that can be passed along to an underling, so it should be seamless as far as the player's concerned.

Open question to those in support of this move: At what point do you say a free agent signing was a bad move? Is any free-agent signing automatically a good move? Is any free-agent signing at a dollar amount which is reasonable for that quality/position automatically a good move?

At what point are you willing to criticize a transaction?

And that's what you call a very, very simple point?

Very funny. I love how Jerry Howarth is thrown into the mix.

Are top tier relief pitchers really that prone to blowing up? When was the last time Rivera or Wagner had a bad year? We're locking up Ryan for his age 30-35 years, which should be his prime. Arguably JP could have scoured the waiver wire and tried to find the next Derrick Turnbow, failing that relied on Frasor or Speier. I still think that the amphetamine ban will make blazing fastballs even harder to hit. It's no wonder JP is going after stuff. Let's see how slow the bats are this coming year. It may not be such a bad thing to go after pitching in this market.

1. Derrek Lee. Wasn't going to happen then or now.
2. Alex Rodriguez. Ditto
3. Albert Pujols. Hah!
4. David Ortiz. Not a chance in hell.
5. Jason Bay. Wow...Jason Bay number five?
6. Michael Young. I don't want him.
7. Miguel Cabrera. The Marlins aren't That Crazy.
8. Travis Hafner. Not chance then, not a chance now.
9. Mark Teixeira. Maybe if we traded Halladay.
10. Vladimir Guerrero. Not a chance then, not a chance now.
11. Carlos Delgado. Too late.
12. Miguel Tejada. Not then, not now.
13. Brian Roberts. Not then, not now.
14. Manny Ramirez. Too much money, even before Ryan.
15. Todd Helton. Rockies won't trade him.
16. Derek Jeter. LOL
17. David Wright. Not then, not now.
18. Brian Giles. Still have a chance.
19. Chase Utley. Could probably be acquired. Don't see how Ryan changes this.
20. Morgan Ensberg. Nah.
21. Andruw Jones. Not then, not now.
22. Jeff Kent. Not then, not now.
23. Victor Martinez. Not then, not now.
24. Ken Griffey Jr.. No thanks.
25. Jason Giambi. NTNN
26. Jhonny Peralta. NTNN
27. Bobby Abreu. JP wasn't interested in his contract even before signing Ryan.
28. Gary Sheffield. NTNN
29. Paul Konerko. Still have a chance.
30. Richie Sexson. Might be able to acquire him. Ryan's signing won't affect it.
31. Lance Berkman. NTNN
32. Adam Dunn. Heh. I highly doube we had the resources to acquire Dunn anyways. But if we did, we still do.
33. Grady Sizemore. NTNN
34. Hideki Matsui. NTNN
35. Felipe Lopez. Heh. Overrated anyways.
36. Jim Edmonds. NTNN
37. Pat Burrell. Might be able to acquire him. Ryan's signing won't affect it.
38. Julio Lugo. Julio Lugo???
39. Jimmy Rollins. Nope.
40. Geoff Jenkins. Uh, no.
41. Rafael Furcal. Wasn't going to sign him regardless.
42. Johnny Damon. No thanks.
43. Marcus Giles. NTNN
44. Chipper Jones. NTNN
45. Aramis Ramirez. NTNN
46. Moises Alou. No thanks.
47. Alfonso Soriano. No thanks.
48. Chad Tracy. Meh.
49. Carl Crawford. 2007 MVP? NTNN
50. Cliff Floyd. Hmmm. This is an intersesting option. Not affected by the Ryan signing though.
51. Jason Varitek. NTNN
52. Troy Glaus. Maybe we could acquire him. He makes a lot, but not so much that it's really hurt by the Ryan signing.
53. Ichiro!. NTNN
54. Tony Clark. No thanks
55. Bill Hall. Bill Hall?
56. Nick Johnson. Could probably get him for Rios, knowing Bowden.
57. Mike Sweeney. Nah.
58. Mark Ellis. Nah.
59. Melvin Mora. Move all 5 of his children to Canada?
60. Joe Mauer. Bwahaha!
61. David Eckstein. Nah.

Well, that was fun. So, in conclusion, we can still maybe get Giles+Burrell.

I believe the quintuplets have an older sibling, hence Mora has six children.

YES. That's exactly what I'm saying.

I don't understand why people can't seem to understand that. I think I've been very crystal clear about this point - that spending $47 million dollars will tend to limit your options somewhat. I really don't see what's so difficult to understand about that. I mean, you might disagree, fine, but I don't see why people don't understand what I'm trying to say.

I think they could have got two of them before. Two of Giles, Burell, Dunn, Ramirez, Griffey Jr., and Abreu.

They can't now. Suppose they sign Giles. Given all the raises everyone is due, that pretty much exhausts their payroll room. Where are they going to get the money to pay the high salary of one of these guys and find the talent to acquire them and the roster spot (okay, the roster spot is a really easy problem to deal with). It's a much, much easier problem when you've got an extra roster spot and $9 million kicking around.

But hey, if it's still possible, J.P. would be crazy not to do it, right? I mean, everyone agrees that the Jays need more bats. I'm putting my money where my mouth is and saying that it won't happen. I even made this wager laughable favourable for the opposition, but putting the cutoff low enough to include guys like Utley and Eckstein, who clearly aren't what we mean by "big bat". Yet nobody is in a rush to take my money. Hmmm.

What'll you do if he does acquire two?

I'll shave my head bald. :)

Interesting... so if the Jays bring back exactly the same lineup, the one that scored 775 runs in 2005, they'll go nowhere. 775 runs just ain't enough, no matter how good your pitching is. Is that what you're saying? Somebody better tell the White Sox, because they just won the World Series fielding a team that only scored 741 runs.

I even made this wager [laughably] favourable for the opposition

No you didn't; you picked the random definition that a "big bat" is somebody who had a VORP over 40 in 2005, not to mention taking it as written in stone that two of these big bats are undeniably 100% essential to the Jays having the remotest chance of winning the World Series. I say the Jays would have to be considered strong contenders if they were to acquire Frank Thomas, Jonny Gomes, and Austin Kearns. This is entirely possible, and none of these three met your 40 VORP criterion.

Yes. 775 runs just ain't enough, no matter how good your pitching is. Is that what you're saying?

No. Somebody better tell the White Sox, because they just won the World Series fielding a team that only scored 741 runs.

Ignore context much? But let's use your logic. Last year the White Sox won 99 games last year. Generally speaking, 11 runs equals a win. So by your logic, the Jays should win about 102 games next season.

Would you care to wager that the Jays will win over 97 games next season? It's a pretty good bet for you - I mean, I'm giving you 5 games in hand.

No you didn't; you picked the random definition that a "big bat" is somebody who had a VORP over 40 in 2005

Fine. Pick another definition. I feel my criteria was pretty generous - I wouldn't consider there to be 61 big bats in baseball. Sure the list is somewhat arbitrary, as it left out some very good hitters, but it also left in some not very good ones.

I know the off-season is the time for optimism, but this is getting crazy. This team has played .480 baseball over the last 4 years and have had 3 losing seasons over that time. They've got a number of glaring weaknesses, yet the seem to be addressing areas that wouldn't seem to be of critical importance.

Okay, you don't like my suggestion that the Jays need two big bats. That's fine - I doubt many people will. In your eyes, what must the Jays do to have a reasonable chance at a playoff spot (whatever you define reasonable as - 10%? 25%? 40%?)

No, I don't. You'll notice I didn't say the Jays were a better offensive team than the Sox - by OPS+ they were equal. I'm sure you could find a different measure to show that the Sox were indeed better, but I doubt it would be by much and I'll shave MY head bald if the Sox were the worst offensive team to ever win the Series.

But let's use your logic. Last year the White Sox won 99 games last year. Generally speaking, 11 runs equals a win. So by your logic, the Jays should win about 102 games next season.

No idea how you arrived at that as my logic. My point was simply that the current Jays offense is not by definition too weak to win the World Series. In combination with their pitching, it probably is, and I'm certainly not advocating that they do nothing to try to improve their offence going into 2006. But the major, important difference between the Jays and Sox of 2005 had nothing to do with offence.

Fine. Pick another definition. I feel my criteria was pretty generous - I wouldn't consider there to be 61 big bats in baseball.

Whether or not your criterion was generous, it was based on the assumption that two big bats are what is needed. I disagreed - none of Thomas, Gomes, or Kearns would really fit a legitimate definition of "big bat", but as I said I'd like the Jays chances with those three on board.

I'm not going to try to set a definition of what the Jays need to do to be a contender in 2006 - they need to add more talent, yes, but there are so many thousands of ways they could go about that that setting a definition of what they must do beyond "they need to add more talent" is a mug's game.

I don't deny that I'm an optimist. My optimism stems from my assessment of the assets on hand and my confidence in Ricciardi & Co. Many of you don't have any confidence in Ricciardi & Co. Some of you seem to believe the Yankees and Red Sox are indominatable, that they have some sort of supernatural protection that will keep them from ever coming back to the pack. You're welcome to those opinions.

Really?

How often? More than other teams?

People just say things...

I think this is exactly it. I think there's a *lot* of unwarranted confidence in this front office. They've done a number of great things in the past, such as gutting salary without too much impact on the field, and acquring free talent such as Zaun, Towers, and Walker.

What they haven't been able to do is construct a roster that wins ballgames. In my view, the team spends way too much focus on pitching, overemphasizes "character" at the expense of talent, carries too many pitchers, carries too many infielders, tries to have *all* their bats be identical (a moderately high average hitter that doesn't strike out too much and hits 10-20 homerruns) instead of having a diversified offensive attack, lacks a good bench, doesn't carry enough talent in AAA for injury insurance (Syracuse hasn't had a winning season under this front office).

Again, I expect most of you will disagree with some/all of that. Just one's person's take, though I expect that it will be verified in the results of the upcoming season.

Some of you seem to believe the Yankees and Red Sox are indominatable

I sure don't. That's what is so frustrating about watching this roster construction and watching .480 baseball for the last 4 years. The Red Sox and Yankees can be beaten!

RE: NFH - Lord of the Rings tickets, eh? That should be doable. Now I just need to think of something that I'd like.

As an aside, TradeSports is offering contracts on the 2006 World Series. The Bid Ask for the Jays is between 1/100 and 1.6/100. This means if you wager $1.60 on the Jays, you win $100 if they win the Series

I've been pretty bearish about the Jays chances, but they're not that low. Looks like a very good deal.

I think that's my problem with the team in a nutshell. They finally got the above average pitching this past year that they were lacking in prior years but the offence was nowhere to be seen in support of it. For a guy that came in believing run scoring was important to success in the AL, that sure isn't what they've produced except for 2003 when Wells had a career season.

Instead of improving on that lineup they continued to shed key pieces of it in the following seasons, culminating for some reason with the departure of Delgado from a team completely devoid of power when payroll flexibility reached an all time high. And so far they've used that flexibility they've gained from Delgado to lock up players like Koskie, Ligtenberg, Speier, Schoeneweiss, and Towers to multi year deals and trade for Shea Hillenbrand.

They had a starting pitcher in Escobar who arguably delivered the same performance as Clement and even Burnett and yet would not go more than 2 years $5 million for him while bidding 3 years, $7+ million for Clement and perhaps now 4 or 5 years and over $10 million for Burnett.

And eventhough I'd rather spend $9 million on Ryan than spread it around among inferior players, I'd rather have seen most of the financial flexibility applied towards a much needed overhaul in offence. Ryan and Burnett together for $20 million a year (maybe $100 million over 5 years) can only help so much if the offence stays at the same level.

The affinity for dirtbags is fine. As long as that isn't costing you value on the dollar. It definately has been for the Jays. And the policy of staying away from dangerously high and long contracts which seemed to be in place for proven commodities like Carlos Delgado seems no longer to be in place for folks with a much more uncertain impact on performance like Burnett and Ryan.

If an excess of $10 million per year for 3+ years is spent on Giles, would a starting offer of at least that much not have been in order for Delgado who is both younger and superior offensively? I'm still trying to figure out what the plan here is as it seems to change often. Though as a symbolic signing alone Ryan has value. I'm just not sure if it's almost $50 million worth of value over the next 5 years. I also suspect it was ownership driven as they also told JP before 2005 that they were happy EXCEPT they wanted a reliable closer since that's the complaint fans were probably giving them most often.

Urge to deal out Frank Grimes rant growing...growing....

Jalen Rose doesn't have half the positive attitude and positive glow that Delgado had. Are you a Toronto Blue Jay? If no, then you have absolutely nothing to talk about. Only Blue Jays will know exactly what role Carlos had, and from all accounts in quotes and interviews, he was nothing short of a positive leader in the clubhouse. Sheesh. Rose doesn't belong in the same sentence as Delgado.

Check the other BJ Ryan page for a link to an update on the signing.

A press conference is scheduled for tomorrow.

This is just nonsense. You can't compare the emphasis on defence in basketball to baseball. They're completely unrelated to each other. But that's already been addressed...

I disagree. Delgado, despite his hollow numbers

Please, explain.

clutch

Oh, nevermind. You're one of those people.

Yes we was. 2.5 k/bb, 8.5 k/9, 0.5 hr/9.

Coming over to the American League will only make things tougher on him. I think the jays are better off to bring in Jarrod Washburn, who is used to American league hitters...

Right... Washburn: 1.8 k/bb, 4.8 k/9, 1.0 hr/9.

Compared to...

Halladay: 6.0 k/bb, 6.9 k/9, 0.7 hr/9.

Towers: 3.9 k/bb, 4.8 k/9, 1.0 hr/9.

Lilly: 1.7 k/bb, 6.8 k/9, 1.6 hr/9.

Chacin: 1.7 k/bb, 5.4 k/9, 0.9 hr/9.

Bush: 2.6 k/bb, 5.0 k/9, 1.3 hr/9.

I think it to be clear that Washburn would be the fifth best starter on the Jays, behind Halladay, Towers, Bush and Chacin (but ahead of Lilly). Slot Burnett in his rightful place (oh so close behind Halladay!), and Washburn drops to sixth.