Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
Everyone seems to think it's a done deal but the specifics are lacking. Troy Glaus appears to be headed for the great white north while Orlando Hudson and Miguel Batista are headed south. There could be a prospect headed to Toronto; the cash side of the deal is unknown; and whether Glaus had to have his deal sweetened is also unknown.

So while we are waiting for the details let's consider some aspects of the deal.

First, big props to JP. He wanted to add pitching and a couple of bats this off-season and he has done it. The team might over or under achieve but now it is definitely JP's team.

Although Boston were rumoured to be in the running they might not have been serious contenders. They have holes to fill at shortstop and centre field and Glaus doesn't fill those.

From a team perspective the trade breaks down as Aaron Hill replacing Hudson; and Troy Glaus replacing Hillenbrand, or Hinske.

Hill and Hudson are forecast to be similar offensively. The Bill James Annual 2006 forecasts Hill to have a higher OBP and Hudson to have a higher SLG. Glaus is forecast to be about 15 runs, or a game and a half, better than Hillenbrand. The defensive aspect is somewhat unknown, Glaus and Hillenbrand are probably a wash while Hudson should be better than Hill although Hill has limited experience at second base.

This trade raises two questions: who is your shortstop next year, Adams or Hill? And who would you trade Hillenbrand or Hinske?

I have ignored Batista and the supposed prospect in this analysis, Batista was a spare part for the Jays while the prospects value is unknown.

With this trade JP has increased his risk. Glaus played most of 2005 but he missed time in 2003 and 2004 with injury. I know from some insider discussions that JP looked seriously at acquiring Glaus last winter. JP has liked Glaus for some time.

I have not discussed budget as we don't know if Arizona are eating any of the contract.

Let's play roster de-construction. Start with 25 players and subtract 12 pitchers, 2 catchers and 4 outfielders. That leaves 7 infielders. Hill, Adams and McDonald leave 4 roster spots for 1B, 3B and DH. Overbay will play first. Koskie and Glaus will split 3B and DH. Who is your backup? Hillenbrand might be the better player but he probably wouldn't be happy being a backup. So look at it this way, Hinske will be 2006's Menechino.

To summarize, compared to 2005 the Jays have:

Upgraded at first base
Declined defensively at second base
Improved at DH
Improved at #2 starter
Improved at closer

The Jays hope Koskie, Zaun and Wells will have a better 2006 than 2005 and that Halladay will not get injured. Finally Ted Lilly will be in his free agent year, statistically a better year for players.

So are you optimistic or pessimistic?
The Unofficial "Troy Glaus is a Jay" Thread | 273 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Barfieldsgun - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 10:03 PM EST (#137501) #
Orlando. If this is true - I loved you like a brother.
Batista. Good bye. good luck.
Glaus. Welcome aboard and I thank a celestial power of some
sort for your arrival.
Rich - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 10:08 PM EST (#137503) #
There's no doubt in my mind that Adams should play second and Hill short, but I'll be surprised if that happens.
Jdog - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 10:22 PM EST (#137504) #
I would have to guess that at least 80% of the posters on this site would like to see Hill at SS and Adams at 2B. Or is it 100%, anybody out there who cant easily see why?

james - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 10:23 PM EST (#137505) #
This report
says young catcher Koyie Hill may also be coming to Toronto.
NDG - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 10:26 PM EST (#137506) #
Oh well, I guess I couldn't like'em all. While i've thought JP's other moves this season were good (Overbay), or okay (Burnett and Ryan), this is the first move I dislike.

By some metrics, O-Dawg's defence alone makes up for the offensive advantage Glaus has. While fielding metrics are flakey, this actually matches my impression of watching him play. Also Hudson is a fan favorite, and team favorite. I hope this doesn't pass as I'll really miss the minimum two unbelievable plays a week I'd see from the O-Dawg.
Mylegacy - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 10:30 PM EST (#137507) #
Only one word covers how I feel:

Supercalifragislisticexpiadilious! Gee I hope I spelt that right.

We trade whichever of Hinske, Hilly or Koskie someone will take. Most likely Hilly.

We are guaranteed at least 95 wins. Bank on it!

As only Rocky Balboa would appreciate, we gonna be contenders!

nicton - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 10:43 PM EST (#137508) #
Off the top of my head I can't think of a team that needs/wants a $5 - 6 mil 3B/1B/DH. Is there even a market for Hiske or Koskie/Hillenbrand????
VBF - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 10:47 PM EST (#137509) #
You won't believe this.

I just bought a Miguel Batista jersey. I'm not kidding and it was a day before the trade was rumoured. I'm some sort of moron. Hopefully Glaus wears number 43.

I think the Jays should hold a community day where people line up at the Dome to give O-Dog a going away "Big Ole Hug". O dear, I just realized--who's going to give BJ that big ole hug?

The underlying story here from a Diamondbacks perspective is the return of Miguel Batista.
Dave Till - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 10:50 PM EST (#137511) #
The Star now lists the deal as having gone through.

The Jays now have six men on their roster who have played third base recently: Glaus, Koskie, Hill, Hillenbrand, Koskie, and occasionally McDonald. (Can *any* of these guys play the outfield?)

I assume that Koskie will be at third (spelled by Glaus), Overbay will be at first, Hill at second, and Adams at short. McDonald will start in the middle infield on the days when defense is more important than offense (i.e. when Doc is starting).

The Jays will have to shoot a new season-ticket promotional commercial, as the one I just saw featured two shots of the O-Dog. I will miss him - and the Jays will miss him more than they might think - but, whoa, that's a lot of home runs.
Pistol - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 10:55 PM EST (#137512) #
From reading Rosenthal I suspect the final word on a completed deal is because they're hammering out things with Glaus. Because the Canadian tax rate is higher Glaus will want to get more added to his contract so the net money to him is the same.

I can't imagine the Jays getting money in the deal. If Glaus was a free agent today he could get 3 years and at least $36 million. So this move will add $2-3 million to this year's payroll which gets it to a shade over $80 million right now.

A Hillenbrand trade for a prospect would get the Jays back around $75 million which apparently is where they want to be. I think that makes the most sense in that Hillenbrand's market value is worth at least his salary (1 year around $5 million) so there's no money to eat and he'll get more in return than Hinske. I also think Hinske could be a good pinch hitter.

Not considering salary the Jays this offseason have added:

Burnett, Ryan, Overbay, and Glaus

and lost:

Bush, Batista, Z Jackson, Hudson, and Gross

That's quite an improvement, although at a cost and not without risk. Of course, if you want a riskless team you can win 75 games every year.

Another positive is that the only prospect traded was Jackson, although there's also the loss of a 2nd and 3rd rounder this upcoming draft (but those players aren't guaranteed to end up as prospects). Heading into the offseason I wouldn't have guessed that if the Jays acquire 4 significant players they would only lose Jackson from the minors.

There was clearly a plan this offseason and it appears the Jays are getting done what they wanted to.

If everything goes right they could be the best team in baseball. If it doesn't they could win 80 games again. The reality is likely to be in between the two. But there's no reason why the Jays shouldn't be in the playoff picture when September rolls around. And that's pretty exciting.
HollywoodHartman - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 10:57 PM EST (#137513) #
Well this report ( claims that the prospect coming our way is 2002 first round pick Sergio Santos.
nicton - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 10:58 PM EST (#137514) #
VBF Stay away from the Halladay jerseys...
Mr. Destiny - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:01 PM EST (#137515) #
So do Hillenbrand and Hinske sit on the bench, or do we trade Hillenbrand to get a corner outfielder that's a cut above Reed Johnson or The Cat?
DepecheJay - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:02 PM EST (#137516) #
And somewhere Vernon Wells is EXTREMELY pissed off! I'd assume that Vern speaks for a good portion of the clubhouse as well. This is a crushing blow to the Jays clubhouse, place however much value in that that you'd like to.

Player for player though, the Jays got an EXCELLENT deal... especially if the prospect is Santos.
Mike Green - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:02 PM EST (#137517) #
What can I say? My favourite player is gone, and all hope of objectivity with it. Bah, humbug.
jgadfly - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:02 PM EST (#137518) #
Koyie Hill's position in college...3rd base
Pistol - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:02 PM EST (#137519) #
Here's the Star's link:

Ron - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:04 PM EST (#137520) #
I would love to have the tax issue explained to me.

When the Grizzlies were here I heard from players, writers, and agents about how American players get taxed more in Canada. But then former Raps GM Glen Grunwald went on the radio and said that's not true unless the player decides to live in Canada year round (which is almost unheard of from an American baseball/basketball player).

Do American players really pay more taxes in Canada if they don't live here year round?
Geoff - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:06 PM EST (#137521) #

and I hope the Jays keep Koskie. We'll need him for infield defence. Of course Glaus pouted to be assured he won't DH. Like I needed a bad first impression of the guy. And management wouldn't want to pay their DH twice as much as the 3B, would they?

I just can't believe this is true, because it still doesn't make sense. Maybe J.P. has something else up his sleeve and sometime in the new year, all shall be revealed.

Until then, I'll be scratching my head and developing a baseball sized hole in it from doing so.

And I think the Jays got Glaus at a fairly inexpensive rate, all things considered, and it's because there wasn't really much of a market for Glaus. The Red Sox can't spend on another 3B, and they can't sacrifice any more defence. They're a mess and trading for Glaus would dig them deeper. The Yankees would only splurge more cash on an unnecessary part if the Red Sox were going to get him. (what's a $10M pinch hitter to sweat about?)

The Metropolitans are already drunk from their acquisitions and most sane clubs are probably scared of Glaus' injury history and possible trade me clause coming into effect.

The O-dog is a beautiful person, but the business bottom line doesn't care much for your points with fans. Miggy has shown more disappointment than potential. All the Padres got for All-Star Loretta was Doug Mirabelli. ( a deal that still smells funny )

Folks in Boston must be defecating in their trousers. Whichever of Boston or New York turns out not to be a contender will have to look at rebuilding. Well, once Boston gets a plan together, maybe they'll start doing that. The Yankees will rebuild after George meets his grave. With a payroll at $336M. And no playoff appearances.
Named For Hank - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:11 PM EST (#137522) #
From reading Rosenthal I suspect the final word on a completed deal is because they're hammering out things with Glaus.

Don't forget the physical -- I wouldn't take on a guy with an injury history without him passing one, and I don't run a baseball team. The people who do run this team are undoubtedly smarter than me and apparently have a physical scheduled for Monday.

Happy Boxing Day, Troy! Does it hurt when I do this?

I sure will miss Orlando Hudson... I suppose we should start thinking about who will replace him on the banner at the top of the page. V-Dub, Sparky and Doc have all had their shot up there in the past, so who should be next?

Or should we extend the honor to the O-Dog of leaving him up there a while longer?
Sherrystar - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:12 PM EST (#137523) #
Just FYI, BA ranked Santos as the D-Backs #3 prospect at the beginning of the year...
Gerry - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:15 PM EST (#137524) #
And the #10 prospect at the end. Santos is a SS who played AAA in 2005 and turned 22 mid-way through the season. Santos struggled early and never recovered although BA is still optimistic about him.
Named For Hank - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:16 PM EST (#137525) #
Of course Glaus pouted to be assured he won't DH. Like I needed a bad first impression of the guy.

What's the reference for that? I missed it. Is it our regular muckraking friends who apparently got snowed by a certain baseball GM this afternoon?
melondough - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:17 PM EST (#137526) #
#3 only behind Quentin and Jackson. I am starting to come around to this.

from Rotowoeld...

2002 first-round pick Sergio Santos is expected to be the prospect included in the Troy Glaus deal with the Blue Jays.
That makes a lot of sense, as the Diamondbacks want to commit at Chad Tracy at third base and also have Stephen Drew, and hopefully Justin Upton, at shortstop. Santos hit just .239/.288/.367 in a disappointing first year in Triple-A, but he only turned 22 in July. He could become a quality regular after another year or two in the minors. Dec. 23 - 10:58 pm et
Source: East Valley Tribune
nicton - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:19 PM EST (#137527) #
Giving back a prospect as good as Santos would leave me to believe the DBacks aren't picking up salary...
Sherrystar - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:20 PM EST (#137528) #

I'm work in corporate taxation and to be honest with you, it's not a simple answer. The U.S. tax system is based on citizenship while the Canadian system is based on residency. Yes, nerdy accounting terms. Bottom line though, it would depend on many factors (ex. does the player pay state tax?) but overall, in most cases, although you'd pay likely less tax in the U.S., it wouldn't be by much.
HollywoodHartman - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:22 PM EST (#137529) #
For all this talk about how Glaus can't make it through a season without getting injured he played 18 more games then Orlando this past season.
melondough - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:24 PM EST (#137531) #
Just thought it was interesting to read one of the comments on the Diamondback chat room (posted this afternoon when word broke):

Yakima Bears
Posts: 95
(12/23/05 4:40:19 pm)
Reply Re: glaus traded to blue jays
There is no way that this deal involves Quinton, Jackson, Drew, Santos, ect. If there is a minor leaguer, it is a minor one. One that probably is in Single A ball and most likely won't make the majors. I repeat, a top prospect will not be invloved.

Sorry "Yakima Bears" but it looks like Santos is the one. From what I have read it does not look like their fan base understands what they are getting in Hudson.
crush_99 - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:32 PM EST (#137533) #
greenfrog - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:34 PM EST (#137534) #
Misc. thoughts:

- I really hate to lose Hudson. It seemed as though the Jays were rebuilding the team around pitching and defense. I wish we'd been able to sign Giles to play RF. Then we could have had our cake (offensive and defensive upgrade) and eaten it too...

- I'm excited about Glaus, but the injuries are a real concern and his contract is long and pricey. He's been on the shelf quite a bit. His BA is low for my liking, but that's quibbling I suppose

- I hope somehow we keep Hillenbrand. He's just a solid player, despite his reluctance to walk. I think the Jays' best bet is Overbay/Hill/Adams/Glaus with Hillenbrand DHing and spelling Glaus at 3rd. Or Overbay/Hill/Adams/Koskie with Glaus DHing and Hilly on the bench or spelling Overbay at 1st. I can't see how Hinske is of any real value, other than an overpriced bench player--and he isn't likely to be much good if he only plays occasionally

- Now I'm glad we have John MacDonald as a reserve SS...
Mike Forbes - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:35 PM EST (#137535) #
I love Orlando Hudson as much as anyone but this is a great deal for the Jays. Troy Glaus WILL hit 40 homers IF he stays healthy for atleast 145 games... And wow, Sergio Santos, I just read a scouting report that compares his bat speed to some Sheffield guy who plays for the Yanks.. Yikes! Santos' position is still abit in doubt but I think he'd have the most value to us as an outfielder.

Welcome to Troy and Sergio, I personally look forward to the seeing you both in Blue Jays uniforms this upcoming season.

And farewell to Orlando Hudson, you will be missed by all.
Geoff - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:38 PM EST (#137536) #
Don't forget the physical
I'm still hoping Glaus fails his physical, the Dbacks regroup and send Green instead. Or maybe Glaus will get the Mike Sirotka physical.
Of course Glaus pouted to be assured he won't DH. Like I needed a bad first impression of the guy.
What's the reference for that? I missed it. Is it our regular muckraking friends who apparently got snowed by a certain baseball GM this afternoon?
Not sure what you're talking about, but I gathered this from reading the Sportsnet and FoxSports articles saying that Glaus will be the everyday 3B and this story on and the fourth last paragraph:
Glaus wanted to know where he fits in the Blue Jays plan before he agreed to waive his no trade clause. The third baseman wants to be used as a third baseman and not as the clubs designated hitter.
I'll hope that he's not really a dick and would DH if that's what's good for the team.
Pistol - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:40 PM EST (#137537) #
Take a look at the picture of Santos in the Scout link above. He's HUGE. He's built like Troy Glaus already.
Ron - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:40 PM EST (#137538) #
With Glaus in the fold, I expect Hillenbrand to be dealt. You have to look around and see what teams are searching for a 3B and have payroll flexability. The Pirates fit the bill. And they Craig Wilson who can play RF and it looks like management has soured on him. The problem is that Wilson will probably make similar money to Hillenbrand next season.

But back to the Glaus trade, I like it.

Finding out O-Dog was going to be leaving the pound stinks. He basically had at least one web gem per game. He's well liked by his teammates and was heavily invovled with the community. IIRC he even personally called Paul Godfrey to say he didn't want to play anywhere else when his name came up in trade talks. He will be missed on and off the field.

As for Miggy .... what happened to the crime novel he was writing?

The Jays needed a power bat. Glaus finished 11th in HR's last season while playing hurt. He is a legit 4 hole hitter. I imagine there's a good chance Wells will see better pitches to swing at next season. I hope Glaus is mainly the DH because Koskie is stronger at 3B.

I assume Hillenbrand will be dealt, so by losing him, you're losing a bat. I don't feel comfortable with Rios as the starting RF. I still believe that position needs to be addressed.

With JP aquiring 3 big long term contracts, he is rolling the dice. I would rather pay big money for a player like Glaus then to divide up the cash to get 2 lesser players like a Hillenbrand and Koskie.

The Jays are finally taking some risks. You will probably never take the next giant step unless you do this.

I can say the Jays today are a vastly better ballclub than the team that was fielded at the end of the regular season.
Geoff - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:44 PM EST (#137539) #
...and in the 'a lot that's changed' in the last 24 hours for Ricciardi as Baker reported, I suspect perhaps what he's referring to is that he has found a destination for Koskie, justifying to Glaus that he is the everyday 3B.
robertdudek - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:45 PM EST (#137540) #
I don't see the team improving at all in this trade.
Geoff - Friday, December 23 2005 @ 11:48 PM EST (#137541) #
Take a look at the picture of Santos in the Scout link above. He's HUGE. He's built like Troy Glaus already.
uh....isn't that a picture of Glaus?

compare 1? & 2?

TamRa - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:00 AM EST (#137542) #
Assorted thoughts...

item - some reports suggest that one of Glaus' conditions for waiving the clause was a promise he would play 3B

item - reports suggest that the Jays have had more inquiries over Hinske than Koskie, likely related to Koskie's injury history

item - that being the case, if you can move Hinske for anything at all and shift at least 3.5 each year of his contract out of town, you have to consider whether shedding that payroll next year is important enough to forgo whatever return you could get for Shea. Hinske, oh he of little playing time, will never have more value in a Jays uniform than he does now. so if he is on the opening day roster, you are pretty much stuck with him. He is, as the left-handed half of a 1B platoon, a decent little hitter.

Assuming you could move Hinske, then Shea backs 1B/3B and DH, while Koskie DH's and relives 3B when Glaus has a wonky Shoulder or knee. In fact, we do well not to underestimate how much good it will do us to have an above averge 3B ready to go if Glaus has some dings.

item - Batting order. Seems to me 3-4-5 ought to be Overbay/Glaus/Wells

item - getting Santos is a VERY nice flavor of icing on the cake. Anyone who's bat is mentioned alongside Sheffield is worth more than Koyie Hill!

item - clearly Adams should be at 2B, thus our gains/losses, IMO, break down like this (for the whole offseason):

A = Glaus replaces Shea = an upgrade
B = Hill Replaces Hudson = Slight upgrade?
C = Overbay replaces Hinske = Upgrade, potentially large

D = Glaus replaces Koskie = marginal loss (assumes CK DH's)
E = Hill replaces Adams = noteable improvement
F = Adams replaces Hudson = indeterminate downgrade
G = Overbay replaces Hinske = noteable upgrade.

(A + B + C) + (D + E + F + G) = more runs and more wins, in my estimation...though someone who's familiar with the higher math can probably break this down in more detail when the deal is final.

item - I love Orlando and all but, tonight, I am a happy camper.
Newton - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:01 AM EST (#137543) #
Santos was rated ahead of all Jay prospects in Baseball America's preseason 2005 rankings.

He was listed at 61 in all of baseball, Hill was listed at 64.

In 2004 Santos was in the top 40.

Well done JP.
smcs - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:01 AM EST (#137544) # is saying that the prospect is Sergio Santos. They say he is a shortstop, but is too big and may need to be switched. He is 6-2, 240 lbs. In 2002, he was listed as 6-3, 205 lbs. Thats pretty big for a shortstop. Last year in AAA, his line was .239/.288/.367, 34 BB, 108 K, 117 Hits, 12 HR, 68 RBI
Wildrose - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:02 AM EST (#137545) #
Ron is correct about the tax issue, you pay Canadian income tax only if your a full time Canadian resident. This is a prime reason why no Raptors or Jays live here year round.

I say keep Hillenbrand, either he or Koskie ( Koskie the better athlete) moves to the outfield. Not sure what the precedents are for such a switch or if its even remotely possible. It sure would help our offence (Guys like Rios/Johnson/Macdonald have a lot of late inning defensive value ).

I knew something was up when they resigned Macdonald, simply too many middle infielders.

Mike B - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:04 AM EST (#137546) #
"I don't see the team improving at all in this trade."

Well, thank goodness that you're not the GM of the most improved team in baseball. This is a stunningly good deal; and with Santos it also addresses the lack of minor league middle infield depth in case Adams or Hill succumb to injury at any point in 2006. Looks great to me.
Dave501 - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:10 AM EST (#137547) #
I'm very sad to see Hudson go, but i must say, i'm so glad it's for Glaus as opposed to Wilkerson or Mench.
Pretty good trade overall.
I wonder if Koskie can be moved to OF. That, or Minnesota. Has JP commented on Koskie lately?
This trade also free's up a spot on the 25 man roster(and likely the 40, anybody know the prospect's status?) which is good. I think we need room for a 3rd catcher in case quiroz bombs. I'm not talking molina, just somebody good enough to earn a gaurenteed major league contract and possibly pinch hit if needed.
james - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:11 AM EST (#137548) #
Still too many infielders. Got to be more moves to come to strengthen the corner outfield positions.
Joe - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:15 AM EST (#137549) #
The banner should probably turn into a rotation of current Jays if the O-Dog truly is gone. Never a dull moment around here!

I'm of mixed feelings about this trade. A little while ago I'd have had no trouble with it, but everyone has convinced me of Orlando's worth to the team. I'm really sad to see him go if it's true.

I think O-Dog's lore is going to grow in the telling. I joked early in last season that he would eventually hit the RF wall tracking down a fly ball. I think that's what I'll tell my grandkids.
Gerry - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:17 AM EST (#137550) #
Robert, why not? What value do you place on O-Dogs defense? and how do you compare Hill to Hudson?
smcs - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:21 AM EST (#137551) #
FWIW, Koskie played 25 games in the outfield for the Twins in 1999. He started in 10, played 103.1 innings and committed one error. Hillenbrand has never played in the outfield but is supposed to be leaner and faster than last year. I think this improved athleticism gives him the edge if the Jays decided to put one of them in the outfiled
TamRa - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:26 AM EST (#137552) #
Count me among those who won't be suprised if by the time Santos is a Jay, he's an OF.

Oh, and BTW, over on the other board I was saying in September that the Jays best bet to add a power hitter this offseason was Troy Glaus (of course that was before I knew about the no-trade clause).

I can't remember if I made such a comment here.

Still, I'll brag every chance I get. ;)
Flex - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:27 AM EST (#137553) #
Robert D., you're usually so thoughtful in your analysis, I too am hoping you'll come back with more than a simple declarative sentence.

With Glaus a rightie, I wonder whether the middle of the order will set up as: Overbay (3), Glaus (4), Koskie (5) and Wells (6).
Geoff - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:29 AM EST (#137554) #
Who should the banner feature? Is there any doubt?


re: devensive rating,
G = Overbay replaces Hinske = noteable upgrade.

no, 'definite upgrade, potentially huuuuge'
melondough - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:30 AM EST (#137555) #
"This trade also free's up a spot on the 25 man roster(and likely the 40, anybody know the prospect's status?)"

Assuming Hinske is the one that gets moved:

Overbay, Glaus, V.Wells, Hillenbrand, Koskie, Hill, Adams, McDonald, Cat, Rios, Johnson, Zaun, Quiroz.

Starting Pichers(5):
Halladay, Burnett, Chacin, Towers, Lilly.

Relief Pitchers(7):
Ryan, Speier, Frasor, Schoeneweis, Downs, Chulk, Walker.

League sent to the minors (or I guess League stays and Chulk or Walker traded or sent down). I suppose this means we shouldn't be taking any RP's back with an OF for Koskie, Hilly or Hinske (as reported, though I can't remember where, that there may be a fit of Koskie to Minny for something and a RP).
VBF - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:34 AM EST (#137556) #
No, the banner should remain Hudson. Maybe we can gold tint him. How about a Batter's Box Hall of Fame and induct our first Hall of Famer?

Something. We can't forget him. Ever.
timpinder - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:46 AM EST (#137557) #
I really like this trade, but I'd be happier if Glaus was the DH only occasionally spelling Koskie at 3B against lefties. If Glaus is the fulltime 3B he is going to get injured and he'll be a defensive downgrade.

I hope they put Hill at SS and Adams at 2B, it makes the most sense.

Rios should stay! With the money now tied up past 2007, there is no way J.P. is going to be able to re-sign Halladay AND Wells. Halladay will be the priority, and with his low OBP, J.P. will likely let Wells walk. Rios will then be able to be the CF post 2007. Hopefully he'll develop and reach his full potential.
Named For Hank - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:46 AM EST (#137558) #
Who should the banner feature? Is there any doubt?

But he's already had his turn, as the first guy on the banner. Someone else needs a turn.

I'm thinking Zaun.
Named For Hank - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:47 AM EST (#137559) #
As for Miggy .... what happened to the crime novel he was writing?

His agent said it was almost done a week or so ago.
Named For Hank - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:48 AM EST (#137560) #
Specifically, I'm thinking of this image of Zaun.
VBF - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:51 AM EST (#137561) #
Definitely Cool.

How about a face of the new Jays? Maybe BJ Ryan pumping his fist after a win or something.

Ryan C - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:53 AM EST (#137562) #
oooo great choice NFH.
Mike B - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:53 AM EST (#137563) #
"I'm thinking Zaun."

I favour a banner featuring Hill and Adams. Now that this is finally clearly JP's team, why not have a banner with the architect's first two first-round picks on it?
Wildfire - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:54 AM EST (#137564) #
Santa Glaus is coming to town, and it's just in time for Christmas! =)
VBF - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:56 AM EST (#137565) #
Although NFH, I must say that everytime I see that banner I'll be cursing under my breath about the Hirschbeck incident :)
Kingsley Zissou - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:56 AM EST (#137566) #
LOVE this trade. I don't need any other presemts for Christmas now.
I just hope JP can somehow dump Hinske and retain Hillenbrand.
An everyday lineup of:

Adams - 2B
Catalanotto/Reeder - LF
Wells - CF
Glaus - 3B
Overbay - 1B
Hillenbrand/Koskie - DH
Hill - SS
Rios - RF
Zaun/Platoon Partner - C

Man...that looks like a DREAM to me.
TamRa - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 01:36 AM EST (#137567) #
Want a chance to say goodbye to Orlando Hudson?

Note this from Blair:

"Want to know why Larry Walker retired? Ask him yourself. Walker and Orlando Hudson will be in St. Marys, Ont., on Jan. 15th for a meet and greet fundraiser at the St. Marys Community Centre from 6-7:30 p.m. with proceeds from the event going toward youth baseball in St. Masrts, the home of the Canadian Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum."

I've got a feeling lots of you guys will see each other there.

also, by the by, on the "Glaus will get injured" rubric:

Glaus played 149 games last year, and more than that in 4 of the previous six seasons.

Koskie hasn't surpassed 140 games in more than 2 of his 7 big league seasons...and has dropped from 140 to 131 to 118 to 97 over the last four seasons.

I like Koskie and all but you guys are going to have to tell me a whole bunch I don't know to show me how it is Mr. Glassman ought to be in the field over Glaus if the deciding factor is injury risk.

(not like he won't get hit by a pitch or pull a hammy on the bases or something but still...)
Ryan B. - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 01:37 AM EST (#137568) #
A lot of people have been saying the Jays have vaulted ahead of Boston in the AL East, but I thought that speculation was a little premature. Now that it looks like this deal is done I think the Jays have in fact passed Boston and are now the second best team in the AL East. Let's compare shall we?

Schilling - Halladay
Beckett - Burnett
Wells - Chachin
Arroyo - Towers
Wakefield - Lilly

Foulke - Ryan

Looking at just pitching Toronto is better. They have a better ace, a similar #2 and a deeper back end of the rotation. I also feel Ryan is a better closer then the Foulke/Timlin experiement.

As for the batting order Boston is better only because they have Ramirez and Ortiz. Once Manny is traded, depending on who they get in return, I think Toronto will only slightly be less of a threat then Boston. And we all know good pitching beats good hitting.

Add it all up and I think the Jays have a legit chance at finishing 2nd in the AL East this year. As for making the playoffs, I can't see this team beating Oakland or Cleveland. I do think the Jays are better then the Twins, Angles and Red Sox.

I have the club pegged for 89-92 wins this year but will miss the playoffs by maybe 5 games.
zaptom - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 01:38 AM EST (#137569) #
How does the Arizona ballpark compare to Skydome? Can we expect Glaus to increase his offense with regard to park factors?

IMO, health concerns aside, this is a great trade. Lets not forget that Hill is above average defensively and can swing the lumber better than Hudson. Provided he has good health, Glaus is just the type of slugger we want in our lineup. Regardles of whether Koskie/Glaus is DH or 3B we are a better hitting team than we were yesterday.

I greatly respect JP for actions so far. At the begining of the offseason he said he was going to get a couple bats and a couple arms and behold, the man has delivered. Its tough to give up a guy like Hudson, but he did it for the the best. Props to you JP. He is not done yet as he has deal with the logjam that's been created. I expect to get some prospects in return. All in all, giving up only Jackson (as a prospect) and aquiring the players that he has is a feat worthy of praise. As for giving up on Bush... another story.

"Hillenbrand has never played in the outfield but is supposed to be leaner and faster than last year."

Yeah, thats what Hillenbrand said he was going to be. I've said a lot of things like that before...
CaramonLS - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:11 AM EST (#137570) #
Arizona I think is more of a hitters park (although I can't say for sure), especially with the summer heat.

Tom Servo - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:20 AM EST (#137571) #
If Toronto DOES land Troy Glaus, what's the possibility of them flipping him to someone to get that OF power JP covets? Shall I beat a dead horse and suggest maybe... Boston? Maybe the Mets will give us Carlos Beltran!

Dreaming is fun!
Amarsh - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:21 AM EST (#137572) #
Been reading here for about a month, love the site, first-time poster.

I think this is a great trade. Way better than Mench or Wilkerson, plus a means to unload Batista. It stings to lose Hudson, but there's a ready replacement behind him in Hill, who is also going to be cheaper over the next couple years.

A two-time silver slugger and former WS MVP, who can hit 40 homeruns... isn't this the one big gaping whole from the Jays 2005 lineup - a true cleanup hitter? Also, having some cleanup protection should also help Wells get back closer to his 2003 numbers.

I think people are over-rating Hudson. I'm sure his clubhouse leadership is great, but someone else can step it up here. Koskie, Zaun and Halladay can all fill the leadership role, but none of them can fill the 40 HR role.

Offensively, it seems the Jays aren't losing anything by going to Hill. Defensively, I know Hudson was the best, but how much of a dropoff is Adams or Hill? Does anyone know off-hand how their range factors compare to Hudson's, and to the league average?
Twilight - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:27 AM EST (#137573) #
I also have to give credit where credit is due, and while I haven't always agreed with JP's moves, I've gotta say he did what he said he'd do.

How many of you here expected anything like this to happen in the offseason? A #2 starter *and* a top flight closer, and now, trades bring in two bats that are going to be actual threats to the lineup. First, the starting rotation punches out with Halladay and Burnett, then reverts to breakout rookie Chacin and underrated Towers and ends up with Lilly--who will either be a #2 or a #5 starter depending on what's working for him that day. That's a nice rotation. And then having a punch of Wells, Glaus, and Overbay is going to present a big problem for other teams. It's not one guy you have to get through, but 3 with slugging potential as well as decent OBP. Throw two fast guys in front of them, and Toronto will not be shut out 13 times in a season again.
Jabes - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:32 AM EST (#137574) #
Hillebrand must be on the move now. I don't think they aquired Overbay just to trade him, and Hinske and Koskie are virtually un-moveable.

Shea would certainly be a good fit for the Twins although they just signed (yikes) Tony Batista.
Michael - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:48 AM EST (#137575) #
I feel this trade is the hardest to evaluate. It all comes down to exactly how good is Orlando Hudson's defense? Because his offense wasn't that good. If his defense is only a little above average than this is a huge win. If he really was one of the top 3 defensive players at any position (which some people seem to claim) then this might not be such a great deal. But one rule of trading players that is very hard to remember but critically important to execute is it is better to trade a guy a year too soon than a year too late. It seems like Hudson is a super hot quantity and should be traded at peak value. If we look at baseballreference for Hudson we see "Ricciardi, you better not trade the O-Dog. He rocks and he's gonna be a great hitter." and I hope that doesn't turn out to be true. If we look at the WARP1 numbers from BP for Batista, Hudson, and Glaus we see:
2001: 5.2 
2002: 3.9 
2003: 5.6 
2004: 5.1 
2005: 3.6

2002: 1.8
2003: 6.0
2004: 5.7
2005: 5.2

2000: 10.0
2001: 5.5
2002: 6.4
2003: 1.8
2004: 2.0
2005: 5.0
So in the last 3 years Hudson has been worth more than Glaus every year and Batista has been worth more than Glaus in 2/3 years. If Glaus can recapture the mid6 to 10 WARP then obviously, all is fine. But it makes one wonder. Since 2001 Batista has put up a WARP of 23.4, Glaus has put up a WARP of 20.7, and Hudson has put up a WARP of 18.7 (but he didn't play in 2001 and only played 1/3 a season in 2002). And Glaus has a much bigger salary. I sure hope JP et al. have a firmer grasp on defense than everyone else and realize that Hudson is way overvalued and that the prospect from Arizona is a really good one, as this seems like a pretty big loss otherwise.
R Billie - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 03:23 AM EST (#137576) #
Santos is a pretty good prospect but hit a major roadblock in 2005. Though he's only 22 he has issues with a shoulder that was operated on in 2004. If he can't regain his hitting from his younger seasons then he loses most of his value.

I said before that Hudson for Glaus is even without the serious salary hit that the Jays take. So they got the prospect back but had to add Batista too. But the idea is that Aaron Hill, either as a shortstop or second baseman, can make up for the loss of Hudson in terms of WARP. Maybe not all of it this year but in time, especially with Hudson's salary growing the next 4 years.

The bigger issue is what becomes of the Koskie/Glaus jam at third. If Hinske can be traded for a loss and Hillenbrand hopefully for a decent return then there can be some arrangement made to shuffle K & G between 3B and DH.
King Ryan - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 03:27 AM EST (#137577) #
Exactly, Michael.

A lot of fans ... hell, every fan knows that Hudson is a good defender, but I don't think ENOUGH fans seem to understand the quantity...or the amount of runs that his tremendous defense prevents. Too many fans seem to say "Well, his defense is great, BUT..." and then push it aside like it means nothing. But a run saved is the same as a run scored.

As I posted in another thread, runs are runs are runs.

If you're afraid of the big scary alphabet soup stats, then just think about it hypothetically: If Glaus is worth 30 runs on offense, and he DH's, and Hudson is worth, say, 10 runs on offense, then all Hudson needs to do is save 20 runs on defense to be of the SAME value as Glaus! Even without looking at the stats, it's not at all unreasonable to assert that Hudson is of similar value to Glaus when offense and defense are considered.

I just do not see this as a big win for the Jays at all.
Joel - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 07:11 AM EST (#137579) #
I appreciate the logic of this trade, but I don't have my heart in it. Moving Batista was important, and as part of a deal for Glaus, has acted as a worthwhile chip.

Watching Hudson's streaky play at the plate, you have to wonder if his value in a trade is as high as it is ever going to get. I'm going to try and withold my dissapointment until I see if his batting improves or not in years to come.

However, like a lot of fans, it would have been nice to find another way to add a power bat and keep Hudson. The Jays will be chasing the wildcard and the Yankees in 2006. Bernie is about the only obvious weak leak in their lineup. It seems you have to try and stack your batting order if you want to compete. J.P. must think he has done this a bit, and the potential numbers bear him out.

I just hope he makes at least one more sensible trade to clear up the logjam on the infield, as there are some guys right now who are clearly going to be cranky not from missing Hudson, but from wondering why they are playing for the Blue Jays and what they are going to be doing in 2006.

Given how Boston seems to have dismantled its infield, and I'm not super thrilled with what they are trying to do with the replacements they got, Jays fans should still be pretty happy that the everyday lineup is upgraded, and the G.M. still as some choices to exercise on the trade market.
Malcolm Little - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 08:07 AM EST (#137580) #
"Oh well, I guess I couldn't like'em all. While i've thought JP's other moves this season were good (Overbay), or okay (Burnett and Ryan), this is the first move I dislike.

By some metrics, O-Dawg's defence alone makes up for the offensive advantage Glaus has. While fielding metrics are flakey, this actually matches my impression of watching him play. Also Hudson is a fan favorite, and team favorite. I hope this doesn't pass as I'll really miss the minimum two unbelievable plays a week I'd see from the O-Dawg."

Very well said. That is also my take on the deal.

And Batista had to go, I know, as we couldn't afford him, but he's not Hiskeian in having to go regardless of return. If the defensive measures are accurate, and they certainly may not be, Hudson may (considering salaries & ages) already have MORE value than Glaus already. Batista goes, too, for what? That prospect, I hope, is a good one.
Wildrose - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 08:50 AM EST (#137583) #
The trade in essence boils down to this question, does the defence lost at second and third, eclipse the potential offence gained at both spots ( salary is a factor as well)?

Unfortunately, while I may quote them as much as the next guy, Win Shares and B.P.'s Davenport translations, compared to how we measure offence, are rather crude instruments. Dave Till mentioned that the Jay's , probably have access to more refined ( read expensive proprietary data )that may tell a better story. I'd love to see what they say about this transaction.

Sergio Santos is interesting, he's totally a tools type prospect, something this orginization usually avoids. I think teams need to be flexible in their approach, so I don't mind this fellow.
melondough - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 09:03 AM EST (#137584) #
I have much enjoyed reading all these comments and posting my own. As mentioned twice before, I also have found it just as interesting to read comments made by the fans who watched Glaus last yr. For those of you who like to do the same I have added two more here (sorry don't mean to bring anyone down but I still dissaprove of this deal). A big HOWEVER though being that if he plays DH atleast 75% of the time then I am a reasonably happy camper. Happy Holiday's!

Enjoy one of the worst hitters with runners in scoring position. 90% of his rbi's were meaningless. He played most of the season(149 games) with a banged up knee. He's not worth the $32 million hes owed over the next three years. He had the most errors on the team last year. A good thing about him is that hes not a clubhouse cancer. Hes realitively quiet. You are getting Sergio Santos who is a big shortstop that was a top prospect in the Arizona organization but had a bad year last year at AAA and also has Stephen Drew and Justin Upton ahead of him. He is only 20 years old and looks like a decent player. Wasn't Orlando Hudson a top prospect with Toronto? Why are they giving up on him? Hes in his mid 20s and there trading him.
Reply to Message Ignore Slopeball008 | Mark Message Unread

#4 - 12/24/05 08:31 AM (Msg Id: 149018:18949) Re:#3
View Profile
Send IM
Send Mail

I did not know Hudson won the gold glove last year, that is making me feel somewhat better about this trade.
One thing about Glaus, when he runs he looks like he is running on glass with bare feet. I remember thinking he was going to pull his hammys or MCL or whatever on every hit he ran out.

Glaus needs to be a DH. When healthy and protected he can produce, just dont ask him to run or play defence.
greenfrog - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 09:13 AM EST (#137585) #
I was checking out BP's pecota comments on Glaus. Here's the 2001 player comment, which I thought was interesting:

"Troy Glaus will soon be one of the best hitters in the AL as long as he continues to ignore the advice of hitting coach Mickey Hatcher. Hatcher told anyone who would listen that Glaus needed to become "more aggressive" at the plate, like success story Garret Anderson. Glaus took 112 walks and hit 47 home runs last season. Hatcher took 134 walks and hit 38 home his 11-year career."
Frank Markotich - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 09:24 AM EST (#137586) #
People seem to be assuming that defensively the team will be going from a gold glover at 2nd to Curly of the 3 Stooges. It's possible that we may be underrating Aaron Hill's defense at 2nd. Maybe he's not Hudson, but in the 20-odd games he played there last year he looked very good (not that my personal observation is worth all that much).

I checked the fielding stats at, and Hudson's zone rating was .839. Aaron Hill? An otherworldly .886. Granted it's only the equivalent of 20 games, so make of it what you will.
Rickster - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 09:37 AM EST (#137587) #
Great point Frank. Hill was an outstanding defender wherever he played last year. He certainly isn't as good as O-Dog, but he's no slouch.

Santos looks interesting. Let's hope it isn't Koyie Hill, a soon-to-be 27 year old who has only had success while playing AAA in Las Vegas, a hitter's park if ever there were one.

I trust JP on this one.
timpinder - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 09:46 AM EST (#137588) #
A good trade IMO, here's why:

Hudson was great defensively, yes. However, assuming Hill takes over at SS and Adams moves to 2B, I think Adams will only be a modest downgrade from Hudson. Half of his errors in 2005 were throwing errors that will be lessened because he's throwing from 2B and Overbay is scooping. His bobbling errors should also decrease simply because 2B is less demanding position than SS and because 2005 was Adams' rookie year. ESPN Insider scouting report ranks Adams as being "Average-Plus" (above average) in ALL aspects, including "Hands", "Range" and "Speed". Hudson hit for better average in the minors, but Adams hit for better OBP and is younger.

As for Glaus, he brings more than just 35 - 40 HR's. I assume he'll bat behind Overbay and ahead of Wells. That means Overbay and Wells will have to be pitched to. Remember how well Well's hit when he had Delgado as protection? Overbay's going to hit a double, Glaus is going to be intentionally walked, and they're going to have to throw a first pitch fastball to Wells to try to get ahead in the count. Gone. That scenerio will happen much more often in 2006.

Glaus' presence should improve Well's and Overbay's numbers.

The point is that while it's sad to see Hudson go, I think the gains achieved by adding Glaus exceed the losses incurred by losing Hudson.

That makes it a good trade IMO.
nicton - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 09:48 AM EST (#137589) #
The trade would give the Jays 8 players signed for 2007 for $64.43 mil...
bird droppings - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 09:51 AM EST (#137590) #
Don't have time to read the thread...

I have two quick notes. As the owner of the O Drum and first person to ever buy a Hudson jersery all I have to say is that O Dog, you have now made me a Diamondbacks fan as much as a Jays fan. Just your presence makes me want to follow that team now.

Aaron, please tell me you still have that Cat and Dog pack for me... I will be heartbroken otherwise.

I am very emotional now. VERY EMOTIONAL. Sniffle.

Don't touch me... I'm all right.

Welcome to Toronto Troy. And since you have a no-trade clause and you came here, I welcome you with open arms. Your replacing two of the greatest Jays ever... Delgado and O Dog. Sniffle. O DOG!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

I think I'll go and look at Glaus' stats now and that'll help dry my eyes.
Rickster - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 10:15 AM EST (#137591) #
After reading Richard Griffin this morning (Getting Glaus For Hudson A Dubious Move - I am now firmly in favour of this deal.

Ken Rosenthal is on Sportsnet now. He says that Glaus couldn't lift weights during the last off-season and he still hit 37 HRs. Rosenthal is also saying there is no interest in Koskie, so Hillenbrand will probably be dealt.

This sure is fun. So much better than trying to sign Todd Worrell.
Nick - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 10:21 AM EST (#137592) #
There is no way to know for sure if the team will be better or worse off after this trade. But I do know this - this team is going for it and it is the most exciting time to be a Jays fan in over a decade. This whole thing could blow up or could get JP named as Executive of the Year. I've decided I don't feel like breaking things down to try to objectively figure out if the Jays got the better of this or their other deals. I'd rather just sit back, be an excited fan, and count the days down to Opening Day. I can't wait.
HollywoodHartman - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 10:23 AM EST (#137593) #
On there is a poll. "Based on current rosters, which team is most likely to challenge the Yankees in the AL East?" And the team in front is...

The Toronto Blue Jays with 55% of the vote. (Boston is in 2nd with 36%)

It's nice to feel loved.
sweat - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 10:25 AM EST (#137594) #
Griffin needs to stop bringing up the past. It's not helpful, and has nothing to do with the Jays at this point. Would it have been nice to keep Delgado around? Of course. Has that ship sailed? yes, and it isn't coming back. I, for one, am going to miss Hudson an awful lot. He was a great team guy, a great fielder, and underrated with the stick(at times). Unfortunately for Hudson, we had good depth in the middle infield, and he was the most valuable trade chip who was due for a decent raise. In anycase, we now have 3 players in our lineup that can really mash instead of just one. I'm very hopeful for next year.
jmoney - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 10:26 AM EST (#137595) #
Well I like Hudson, but the Jays are not putting a sloutch at second base. If this is where Aaron Hill is destined; then he looks more then capable.

Hill played well at every position the Jays asked him to play last season, and if we can observe that Hudson was an execellent defender; then we can say that Hill is a very good defender in his own right.

Of course, the Jays don't have anyone of Glaus' calibre on the major or minor squads. He can flat out mash, and I have to think that will make the Overbay acquisition and Well's offensive numbers look better. (I admit that's a gut feeling and not back by numbers)

timpinder - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 10:33 AM EST (#137596) #
I found myself laughing outloud reading your post. Yeah, Griffin's a dud.

Anyway, every reporter is writing that Hill will be replacing Hudson at 2B. Am I the only one who thinks Adams should/will be moved to 2B and Hill will be taking over at SS????
Malcolm Little - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 10:33 AM EST (#137597) #
"With JP aquiring 3 big long term contracts, he is rolling the dice. I would rather pay big money for a player like Glaus then to divide up the cash to get 2 lesser players like a Hillenbrand and Koskie."

And thank goodness he is. Otherwise, we're the KC Royals or Pittsburgh Pirates.

Bring on the Evil Empires and their nearly $400 million payrolls! JP'll give 'em heck!
Matthew E - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 10:33 AM EST (#137598) #
I look at it like this. If Adams and Hlll can step up with the glove, it's a great trade. If they're just ordinary, it's a good trade. But I'll miss Hudson.

I was going to say about Hudson, "Remember the..." but I think I'll save it for the 'Gone But Not Forgotten' thread, if and when it appears.
robertdudek - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 10:36 AM EST (#137599) #

The basic idea I have is that Glaus is exactly the type of player that is most overrated by fans and baseball people alike. Namely, a guy who hits lots of homeruns but has only a slightly above average OBP, and a player of limited defensive value.

Let's put it this way - Glaus isn't that much more offensively or defensively valuable than Hillenbrand. Arizona is one of the best hitter's parks in the majors so his numbers last year have to be downgraded a bit. Putting Glaus at third base instead of Koskie is a huge downgrade defensively, bigger than the gap between Hudson and Adams or Hill at 2B. Since Koskie is unlikely to be traded and Glaus will have to play at least half the time in the field (I'm sure these issues were part of the negotiations), Glaus will essentially replace Hillenbrand's ABs when the latter gets traded.

Do you really want to be downgrading your infield defence with two groundball pitchers getting (crosses fingers) 30% of your innings, like Halladay and Burnett?

Whatever you gain on offence you are giving back on defence.

Nothing about the prospect's (Santos) minor league record says future star. He's going to be a decent major leaguer, but that's about the best case scenario.

Ducey - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 10:37 AM EST (#137600) #
I think that Hinske is the odd man out as a result of this trade. You therefore have to look at it as Hinske and Hudson for Glaus and whatever the Jays get for Hisnke (likely nothing of value for this year).

Compare the proposed lineup with last years (VORP):
SS Adams 18.9
Lf Cat 26.4/ Reed 9.6
CF Wells 32
DH Shea 32.5
3B Koskie 11
c Zaun 20.1
1B Hinske 17.1
RF Rios 3.8
2B Hudson 17.4
Utility Hill 12.4/ MacDonald 3.5
Total VORP 204.7

2B Adams 18.9
LF Cat/ Reed 36
CF Wells 32
1B Overbay 33.3
3b Glaus 45.4
DH Shea 32.5
C Zaun 20.1
SS Hill 12.4
RF Rios 3.8
Utility Koskie 11.0 Mac 3.5
Total 248.9

So the Jays have gained 44 points of VORP. They have lost D at 2B but improved at SS.

I am sure there are other stats that can be used to measure the overall difference....
robertdudek - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 10:43 AM EST (#137601) #
An added note - god forbid they should try to make Hillenbrand an outfielder.
danjulien - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 10:49 AM EST (#137602) #
You read my mind robert...I think they might try to make either Hinske or Hillenbrand(whoever stays probably) a LF along with their skills at 1b/3b. It would SUCK defensively however, it could lead to many more options for the lineup. Say we need more pop and what not...Cat's not that good a fielder anyways...
nicton - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 10:51 AM EST (#137603) #
Who's looking for a " Hinske " type player??? Glaus is much better and the market was 2 teams.
robertdudek - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 10:56 AM EST (#137604) #

You can't keep the same VORP totals for each player; you must adjust for playing time.
BrockLanders - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 11:03 AM EST (#137605) #
Robert Dudek, I completely agree with all your points. If Glaus is the next Mike Schmidt why did Arizona immediately ship him in less than 2 years of signing him??!?!? And secondly, why would have an astute GM like Bill Stoneman let him leave if he was so great (forget McPherson because I think it goes deeper than that)?? I believe these organizations are weary of the injuries that Glaus seems to be habitually plagued with. Knees, back, shoulder. These are chronic injuries that players in their mid to late thirties experience.
Thomas - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 11:08 AM EST (#137606) #
As for the earlier comments that said that they assume JP has more data than BP or UZR, JP has said before that his main tool that he uses to evaluate defence is the naked eye. I doubt JP has been pouring over some advanced defensive stat and is using it to justify the trade.

I'm not saying he doesn't look at those stats, but he primarily uses his eyes to examine defence (at least according to every comment he's ever made) and I doubt this trade is any different.
Rickster - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 11:13 AM EST (#137607) #
Re: injuries
Glaus might prove to be more durable than O-Dog in the next two years. JP has done his homework - this isn't the Orioles we're talking about here.
Mike Green - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 11:18 AM EST (#137608) #
If the trade goes through, it also is likely that John McDonald will get 200 at-bats in 2006 facing lefties.

The difference between Glaus-Adams-Hill-Overbay infield vs. a Koskie-Hill-Hudson-Overbay infield defensively is huge. BJ Ryan will be fine; Doc will be fine. All of the other pitchers will notice the difference. Last year the team's fielding independent pitching was 4.44, and the team's ERA was 4.06. That positive effect from the defence is unlikely to be seen in 2006.
nicton - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 11:18 AM EST (#137609) #
I don't think this trade would have 1 thing to do with defence. It all has to do with HRs. Glaus has been extremely consistent .250ish/350ish/500ish over the last 4 - 5 seasons. He'll hit 40ish HRs. And he plays some position on the field...
Chuck - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 11:18 AM EST (#137610) #
If Glaus is the next Mike Schmidt why did Arizona immediately ship him in less than 2 years of signing him??!?!?

Are we now supposed to use Arizona's management team as a barometer? The same braintrust that saw fit to bestow millions of dollars upon Russ Ortiz, who had walked 214 in the two previous seasons? Or trade for a very expensive, past his prime Shawn Green?

Arizona is looking to lessen payroll and deal with overcrowding at their infield corners. The Jays, themselves already overstocked at the same positions, seem strangely willing to further exacerbate their problem.

Jim - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 11:20 AM EST (#137611) #
'Are we now supposed to use Arizona's management team as a barometer? The same braintrust that saw fit to bestow millions of dollars upon Russ Ortiz, who had walked 214 in the two previous seasons? Or trade for a very expensive, past his prime Shawn Green? '

Different guy.
Nick - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 11:24 AM EST (#137612) #
Brock - The next Mike Schmidt? Who said anything about that? If anyone is expecting Troy Glaus to be Mike Schmidt this season, they will be disappointed. Luckily, I don't think anyone is expecting that.

Anaheim let Glaus go because Arizona was willing to commit over $40 million to a guy who had serious injury concerns. Arizona's gamble paid off for last season as Glaus put together a good season. Now they have some good, young and cheaper players who they feel can provide production at a reduced cost and that they can best put the money they would have to pay Glaus on plugging other holes. I don't think Arizona thinks Glaus is a bad player. The Angels will be starting Edgardo Alfonzo at 3B next year. You don't think they'd rather be starting Glaus instead? Come on.

Just because a player plays for multiple organizations does not necessarily reflect poorly on the player's abilities and production.
BrockLanders - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 11:32 AM EST (#137613) #
Nick, I was being facetious with the Schmidt comparsion. It was basically a humorous counter to some of the 50 HR projections I was reading.

Look, I never said Glaus was a bad player. My point is that given the similar shortcomings of Corey Koskie last season and the intangibles Hudson brought to the field, it would scatch one's head why this organization would want to be endure the stress of committing such a large sum of money to such a brittle player whos ironically under 30. I know the market is thin but this reeks of desperation. If Glaus can rack up 525 at-bats and provide the odd homerun, this trade can work but his red flag injury history says otherwise.

Jim - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 11:39 AM EST (#137614) #
'If Glaus can rack up 525 at-bats and provide the odd homerun,'

If only he didn't have 634 plate appearances last year with 37 odd homeruns mixed in....

I think it's pretty clear they aren't stressed by committing the large sum of money to Glaus. Once you've given 55 million dollars to AJ Burnett you can't turn yellow on a guy who will have over 250 home runs by his 30th birthday and is 90th on the career slugging percentage leaderboard for all-time.

It's either moves like AJ, BJ, and Glaus or an eternity in 3rd place. At some point you've got to show you've got some onions.
Barfieldsgun - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 11:44 AM EST (#137615) #
How can anyone not be convinced that this move had to be
done for the betterment of the team?
We just added a bonafide masher to a line-up devoid
of a true cleanup hitter. A critical part of any offensive
juggernaut. We needed this a hell of alot more than we
needed anything at the end of '05.
I was a strong supporter of the Hudson/Batista for Adam
Dunn rumor that never materialized. This basically had
the same result.
Wells might be pissed about Hudsons departure now.
Ask him how he feels at the end of the season when he
has numbers similar to '03 because of big Troy Glaus
offering protection from behind.
This could possibly be the finest off season in Jays
rIbIt - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 11:44 AM EST (#137616) #
Ballsy move. I agree w/the opinion that, despite the notable lost D, the benefits to the rest of the batting order will (at least) balance things out.

The aforementioned Sun writer is a tool. Who knows if Delgado is a better fit than Glaus? The squad needed power and they addressed for keeping Delgado, what would he rather the Js have done?

Hudson was an incredible defender. Don't forget about Butter. The middle infield, while less spectacular, will be just fine.

Batista? Probably better off in the NL.
Nick - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 11:45 AM EST (#137617) #
Glaus, 29, led the D-Backs with 37 home runs and 97 RBIs while playing the final five months of 2005 with a strained tendon behind his left knee, which limited his mobility.

It is very possible (maybe even probable) that Glaus will get injured again next season, but it appears a big reason behind his poor defensive showing was a knee problem. If his knee is healthy going into next season, I think he can be an average defensive third baseman. Of course, the injuries are a problem, but at least it appears that it's not like his skills have deteriorated to the point where there is no hope for defensive improvement next year. I'm not saying it's probable he'll be a better defender next year, but it's possible and not unlikely.

Ski - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 11:55 AM EST (#137618) #
"It's either moves like AJ, BJ, and Glaus or an eternity in 3rd place. At some point you've got to show you've got some onions."

Red ones or the Big yellow ones? And are they tied to J.P.'s Belt ? (which was the style at the time....)

sorry, one of my favorite Grampa Simpson ramblings........
DepecheJay - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:11 PM EST (#137619) #
Why are people assuming that the middle infield will be "just fine"? Russ Adams was a miserable defender last season, and Aaron Hill has played in a limited capacity at second base.

And for those in favor of starting Russ at 2nd and Aaron at short, think of the adjustment that Aaron will have to make. He's basically going to be a rookie shortstop, or at the same stage as Adams was at the start of last season. That means you're probably going to have to sit through 20-25 more errors from the shortstop position,,, AGAIN. Then you have to figure that it will take Adams a while to adjust to second base and you face the possibility of an absolutly disastrous infield defensively when you couple in Glaus. The only bright spot would be Overbay and he's a 1st basemen.

I absolutly hate this move with a passion. If, as someone says, Glaus' addition the lineup "balances out" the loss of O-Dog's defense... what was the point of making the deal? Sure the offense is improved, but the defense is now looking not so hot. Burnett/Doc are extreme groundball pitchers and now one of the best defensive 2nd basemen in the game is gone and your shortstop was already a well below average fielder to begin with. That is not a recipe for success.

Also, what about the budget? Wasn't it set at 75 million? This move means that contracts are going to have to be dealt, but who the heck wants Eric Hinske or Corey Koskie? A puzzling move in my opinion.
jbrains - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:18 PM EST (#137620) #
Glaus and Hudson were within 3 runs of each other overall in 2005, accoring to Baseball Prospectus. What I find interesting is Glaus' offence (43 runs above replacement) is only 1/2 win better than Hudson's defect (37 RAR). The totals are Hudson 53, Glaus 50.
jbrains - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:28 PM EST (#137621) #
Wow... make that "defence"; not "defect". Apparently I had something else on my mind. Definitely not Freudian, there.
Glevin - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:33 PM EST (#137622) #
"It's either moves like AJ, BJ, and Glaus or an eternity in 3rd place"

I disagree very strongly with this statement. At some point, most teams need to spend some money to win, but I disagree that this was the time and am certain that these are not the right guys to spend it on. The Jays will be spending something like 34 million a year over the next 3 years on 3 players, none of whom are great and all of whom come with huge risks attached. If you are the Yankees you can afford to do this, but the Jays can't. Most teams have to look for bargains at certain positions (usually closer is the easiest to find a bargain at. There were a lot of good, even great closers last year who made under 2 million dollars just as there will be this year). To me, the Jays spent tens of million a year making rather minor upgrades. (Unless Burnett at 29 becomes a CY Young kind of guy). They have a shot at the playoffs this year, but I think they will be in terrible shape in a couple of years.
rIbIt - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:46 PM EST (#137623) #
It seems a lil harsh to describe Adams as a "miserable defender". He wasn't that horrible. Hopefully he'll improve some, too.

I agree w/your assertion that putting Hill at short will set the D back (pun unintended) some.

As for the "balancing out", I wasn't suggesting that this move is counterproductive. The significant Offensive benefit will take some of the sting out of the Defensive loss.

I'm certain this statement will get stomped on, but, you have to shoot to score. Even if JP misses the target completely, I for one, am glad to see the attempt.
Mike Forbes - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:47 PM EST (#137624) #
Its fun looking at everyone making predictions.. When really no one in this world has any clue how this deal will turn out in the end. What happens if Hudson completely destroys his wonky hamstring, ala Nomar Garciapara and loses his godly range? Or maybe Miguel Batista will win the NL Cy Young next year? Maybe Troy Glaus tears his MCL and we're forced to bring up Santos? Maybe Santos hits 30 homers and wins the ROY? Maybe Santos ends up becoming the next great power hitter in baseball. Or maybe Troy Glaus hits 40 homers and leads us to the World Series?

Anything could happen. Thats what makes this so fun. Calm Down.
Geoff - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:49 PM EST (#137625) #
For those complaining about Hudson's value being lost and that he's worth more than Glaus -- while that's debatable -- his value is in different areas and they complement other players in different ways.

Glaus can have an effect on other hitters in the lineup to a tremendous degree. His true impact is there.

Hudson, of course, is an impact player with the glove and can alter innings and pitching records. Likewise tremendous.

But the Jays must be more confident in their replacement of Hudson's impact than in replacing what Glaus would bring, what they need, which is a power threat. It's the whole virutous circle thing that gets dropped here every so often. The team relies on/reflects the interaction of its parts' production. Changing one player can have a dramatic effect.

Now, if the punk would only accept DH and be the nastiest bat this side of David Ortiz, I'll be a Glaus booster. More than 50, baby!
R Billie - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 12:52 PM EST (#137626) #
Well you're going to drop defensively overall from Hudson and you won't avoid that. And it's likely that Hudson would have left after 2006 no matter what. He might have made $2.5 million+ in arbitration this year but at $4 to $5 million in 2007 and maybe up to $6 to $7 million in 2008 and then free agency...did it really make sense to keep him while an asset like Aaron Hill could effectively play either SS or 2B? Nothing I saw in the field last year suggested he could not.

If it's a matter of putting the players in positions that suit them long term, I don't think it makes a huge difference where either of Adams or Hill play. Hill has spent his entire minor league career playing short and there would be no "adjustment" to playing it at the major league level. Like any young player he will likely make more errors early in his career and fewer errors towards his prime, just as Hudson did.

Adams spent his college career playing second most of the time. Generally the level of ability in college is less than that in the minor leagues. If he was really suited to shortstop I'm pretty sure they would have played him there in college.

The shift from SS to 2B isn't as big a deal as shifting in the other direction. It's a different position but it's not like it's completely alien to Adams. 2B and 3B is probably MORE unfamiliar to Hill than 2B is to Adams as Hill pretty much played nowhere but short except the AFL.

You're also looking at a situation where Hill's arm is strong enough that he's not likely to make that many more errors at SS than 2B. Conversely, Adams because of the lesser arm strength required will probably cut his errors significantly moving over to 2B. So you're looking at a significant drop at 2B no matter who plays there but Hill could represent a significant IMPROVEMENT at SS over Adams which could largely make up for the drop at 2B.
Mylegacy - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 01:08 PM EST (#137627) #
Dear, oh dear, oh dear.

What a bunch of dreary old ladies.


Remember how we all loved Joe Carter? Well Glaus is Carter on steroids! Instead of Carter's .312 OBP we're getting a guy with at least a .360 this year! Way more on base, and way more power than Carter! AND, we all loved Carter! We are all gonna go gaga over Glaus! Mark my words. AND a 6'3" 240 pound shortstop prospect with a bat speed like Gary Sheffield AIN'T SO WORSE!!!

Hudson was Robbie without the offense. MARK MY WORDS... Adams and Hill will be AT LEAST middle of pack defensively and Hill will FAR surpass Hudson with the bat.

I love this deal, DEAL OR NO DEAL? I say DEAL!!!! Deal of the century!!

By the way, the very, very best of the season to all my fellow Bauxites. May you all live long and prosper.

AND, yea I'm gonna miss the O'Dog like crazy. Any guy that agrees with me that JP looks like a pimp can't be all bad!!!
timpinder - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 01:11 PM EST (#137628) #
Geoff and R Billie, great posts.

I agree completely with both. If Glaus would DH and Koskie was left alone at 3B, that would be better defensively. If Adams was moved to 2B his errors would decrease, especially with Overbay receiving at 1B. Hill's arm is great and he will make a better SS than Adams IMO.

SO: If Koskie plays 3B against righties and Hill takes over at SS, then in 2006 your D at 3B remains the same, your D at SS improves slightly, your D at 2B decreases moderately, and your D at 1B increases moderately.

This is not the end of the world. I'll take the 40 HR Glaus will bring plus the protection he'll provide to Wells and Overbay over the loss of D at 2B anyday.

I'm a happy little Jays fan right now. If we could only get another catcher for insurance with the Hinske/Hillenbrand trade to come, then this team would be complete.

Oh yeah, Hudson is awesome defensively. But for those of you who are insiders at ESPN, check out Adams' scouting report. He is rated as above average in all defensive categories. He's not Alfonso Soriono at 2B, he won't be Hudson, but he'll be fine.
R Billie - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 01:11 PM EST (#137629) #
As for the earlier comments that said that they assume JP has more data than BP or UZR, JP has said before that his main tool that he uses to evaluate defence is the naked eye. I doubt JP has been pouring over some advanced defensive stat and is using it to justify the trade.

If that's true then this team is in trouble with JP evaluating the defence. He has insisted Russ Adams is fine at shortstop which he isn't. He just doesn't have the tools to stay there.

And no matter what he says now, he also signed Hinske to a 5 year, $15 million deal under the assumption that he would be a capable third baseman who would hit similar to his rookie year. That is the only thing that would justify giving that kind of contract to a player that just completed his first year and had obvious issues playing third.

He also went as far as to say that Hinske could be a gold glove third baseman in the second half of that year when Butterfield improved Hinske's D from gagworthy to barely tolerable. Today Hinske might not be worthy of the platoon DH role to which he's been pushed.

Kenny Rogers was traded for in Oakland under the assumption that he would be a centerfield solution for the A's. A few years after that he couldn't even play passably in left field. So you'll have to excuse me if I don't implicitly trust JP's naked eye in determining who can play defence. In fact, I'm more inclined to believe the OPPOSITE of whatever JP says in determining who can play defence in certain cases.

I think the Jays will manage with a combo of Hill, Adams, and MacDonald. Glaus has to stay healthy and produce and Santos needs to turn into a useful or plus middle infielder. The Jays just have to make sure Hill and Adams now play the positions best suited to them. There's no sense continuing to subject Adams and us to the torture of him playing shortstop because of hubris.

Mylegacy - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 01:20 PM EST (#137630) #
Hill's arm is A+. He has less range than Adams.

Overbay's "scoop" will cover for Adams arm. (Hilly and Hinske did pretty good at that too.) Hill only has the range to be a 2nd or third baseman.

Now, if we could just graft Hill's arm to Adams. Where's Dr Frankenstein when you need him?
Ducey - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 01:24 PM EST (#137631) #
"Kenny Rogers was traded for in Oakland under the assumption that he would be a centerfield solution for the A's. A few years after that he couldn't even play passably in left field. "

R Billie - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 01:41 PM EST (#137633) #
"Hill only has the range to be a 2nd or third baseman."

Hudson has more range than most infielders in baseball and definately much more than Adams. His arm was probably better too and his fielding and throwing mechanics definately were. I've often thought that the Jays should experiment with Hudson at shortstop.

Range is extremely useful everywhere. Running down a looper in right field or into the right field foul territory is just as valuable as doing the same thing on the left side. It should not be a determining factor in who plays second over short.

The difference in arm strength and sound mechanics makes a much bigger difference to playing shortstop when you have a player who is as poor as Adams in those categories.


I'm refering to a trade that happened in Oakland when JP was still Assistant GM there. Kenny Rogers was the A's ace when he was traded and Terrence Long was the principle return. Within 2 or 3 years of that trade, Long became a much bigger anchor in the A's outfield than Hinske became in the Jays infield. JP said at the time the trade was made something along the lines that Long would make people forget about Rogers in time.

Now people like Griffin who bring up that the Jays could have signed Delgado (who is a far more durable and superior player to Glaus) actually bring up a great point. Delgado was obviously undervalued even by his own team who figured 2 years at $6 million per was a reasonable offer.

Now JP has no problem trading significant assets for a guy who makes almost as much money, is more brittle, is just as defensively suspect, strikes out more, walks less, and hits for less average. JP is having to make a lot of moves now to make up for moves in the past. I'm just hoping we won't have to be making another expensive trade down the road to make up for losing Hudson now.

And now with over $60 million commited to 8 players in 2007, aren't we in a very poor position financially anyway? Halladay has to be extended. Wells has to be extended. Is this much better than we would have been with Delgado still on the team and Hillenbrand (who probably has to be moved) never signed?
timpinder - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 01:49 PM EST (#137634) #
Possible 2006 Jays lineup and their CAREER stats:


LF Catalanotto L .297/.359/.456
SS Hill R .274/.342/.385
1B Overbay L .285/.373/.450
DH Glaus R .253/.358/.501
CF Wells R .285/.330/.481
3B Koskie L .277/.369/.455
C Zaun S .251/.342/.375
2B Adams L .262/.329/.401
RF Rios R .273/.321/.390


Halladay R 3.70/1.26
Burnett R 3.73/1.28
Chacin L 3.65/1.35
Lilly L 4.67/1.37
Towers R 4.49/1.33
(Hopefully with McGowan ready soon and Purcey shortly thereafter)

Chulk R 4.25/1.42
Schoeneweis L 5.02/1.46
Frasor R 3.65/1.36
Speier R 4.14/1.23
Ryan L 3.54/1.32
(And any two of Downs, Marcum, Walker, League, maybe even Gronk or Rosario)

That looks like a pretty damn good team to me on paper. I hope Glaus agrees to DH though.
BrockLanders - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 01:52 PM EST (#137635) #
Rbillie, you tie it up all very nice. I'd like to state that I'm a jays fan first and foremost, and put the performance of this team above any qualms I have with the general manager. But knowing what we know on December 24th, you just have to chuckle, when we heard J.P. quip about the financial burden Ash left on the team. If he doesn't win, these moves could setback the organization for a decade.
Mylegacy - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 01:55 PM EST (#137636) #
Payroll is going to be interesting. We've 60 odd mill tied up in 07 now.

With a payroll of 75 mill in 06 that leaves us 85 mill for next year (07). That should be OK. The question is will it have to drop to 70 mill in 08? If so...good grief Charlie Brown.
Some call me Tim - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 01:57 PM EST (#137637) #
It's interesting how down on this trade so many people are because we had to give up Hudson, but the reality is you usually can't get a good player without giving up a good player. Everyone agreed that we needed another strong batter before this trade happened. Unfortunately, Hudson was our best bargaining chip and we had to use him. He will be missed, but so are many players that are traded. I remember being devastated when Tony Fernandez was traded in that blockbuster, but I got over it when I saw the Jays competing for a championship.

If he's healthy (and yes that's a risk but so was Hudson's health), Glaus will provide a major upgrade to our offense. Either Hill or Adams will be able to take Hudson's place with above average defense and better offense than Hudson. We dealt from an area of strength, which is what you have to do if you want to improve.

Obviously, what happens next will also affect the evaluation of this trade. If JP can foist Hinske off on someone and keep Hillenbrand, I will be very happy.

Overall, JP has already vastly improved this team this year. We still might not win, but at least we have a chance!
DepecheJay - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 01:57 PM EST (#137638) #
Will Overbay's "scoop" save all those balls that Adams is going to airmail over his head?

I believe that Adams is a horrible defender because I watched nearly every game last season and rarely did you see any "flashes." When Hudson was a rook, last year with Hill, you saw those flashes which made you believe that the guy had the potential to become a great defender. I believe that Hill will be a fine defender, but Adams? He's junk. He has no arm and that nulifies the fact that he has pretty decent range. How many times did he range to his left to make a play in the hole to simply have to eat it because his arm isn't strong enough to even attempt to make the throw.

Also, I think JP is too stubborn to make the switch in the first place. I'm all for switching Hill and Adams on defense, but not only do you have the possible adjustments, but would JP even do it? As R Billie said, he's CONVINCED that Russ Adams is going to be a good defensive shortstop. I can't see him suddenly switching the two, even though it probably makes the most sense for the team.

And yes, I know that Hill has played shortstop his whole career. That's not the adjustment I am talking about. Most rookies make a ton of errors, especially at shortstop. Are we willing to go through that again? How is Adams' pivot on double plays? All of these are questions that MUST be addressed in Spring Training.
timpinder - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:01 PM EST (#137639) #
R Billie,
I think that in a worst case scenario, barring major injury, most of the big contracts J.P. has issued are moveable. (See Glaus from D-Backs to Jays). A contending team might take Ryan, Burnett or Glaus off the books at the deadline if the Jays decided it didn't work and wanted to cut payroll and rebuild.

I REALLY hope they extend Halladay's contract, but I just have a feeling that Wells is gonzo. He'll be due for a huge raise, and J.P. loves the guys with the high OBP. (Definately not Wells)
If Rios steps up, I have a sinking feeling that 2007 will be Wells' last as a Jay. I have nothing to back that up, just the $$$$$ situation and J.P.'s history. How many trade rumors have we heard involving Wells? Sheffield, Abreu, Wilkerson, etc.... Yeah, if I had a million I'd bet Wells is playing elsewhere in 2008.
BrockLanders - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:04 PM EST (#137640) #
Pinder, I'm in complete agreement with your assessment on Wells' future. I think the Hudson trade can be viewed as the line in the sand for Wells. He wasn't too thrilled when asked about reupping with Toronto last season and now they ignore his plea and trade Hudson after originally going on the record to the contrary. Vernon is a lame duck.
Geoff - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:06 PM EST (#137641) #
Interesting to note that Glaus had his best season in 2000 when he was in a lineup full of mashers. Three other guys with 35+ HR, another with 25 HR and a .400 OBP

If it wasn't for the fact that our LOOGY was the team's ace, that team might have intimidated somebody.

Then Glaus in 2001 was abandoned offensively. He still mashed home runs and still got his OBP, but not as well as before.

Then there's Troy's WS year, 2002, when Schoenman went back to LOOGY duty and Glaus had some more support, but not enough to do 2000 damage. Note that he was the weakest link defensively each year.

I expect Troy's production to be similar to 2002, with a similar lineup around him, starring Shea Hillenbrand as Brad Fullmer, Aaron Hill as David Eckstein, Russ Adams as Adam Kennedy, Vernon Wells as Garret Anderson, Lyle Overbay as Scott Spezio, Alexis Rios as Darin Erstad and Reed/Cat as Tim Salmon, with Zauny as our own little Bengie Molina.

Plus, I'd hope we'd get more power off the bench (10 home runs? *choke* how did they win the WS? Oh yeah, bullpen.)

Pretty good looking there, Jays. But there's still one last day before Christmas, what else can we ask J.P. for this Christmas?

How about a good table setter, the Juan Pierre/Podsednik-type? Anyone available? Nah...JP will probably add another corner infielder or two. Durazo's still available, isn't he?

Ducey - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:16 PM EST (#137642) #
"You can't keep the same VORP totals for each player; you must adjust for playing time."

I know. My calculations are rough. But I also did not factor in that Hill (who had 361 AB last year) will get all of Hudson's AB so his VORP should be higher in 2006.

Assume the outfielders, SS and catcher get the same number of AB (reasonable I believe). Hill takes Hudson's AB. You then have 1800 AB between 1B, 3B and DH. Last year, Glaus had 538 AB, Shea had 594 AB, Overbay had 537 AB. That leaves 131 AB for Koskie. Koskie had 354 AB last year so cut his VORP in half to 5.5. I think Hill will add 5.5 points to his VORP (which would make him the same as Hudson offensively)if he plays full time.

The net result is a 44 point improvement in offense. That is like adding the 50th best player in baseball to a lineup spot that produced a VORP of 0 last year.

Now I did not look at plate appearances, I am not looking at defence, and my numbers are only rough, but I think generally my analysis is right, isn't it?
Chuck - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:19 PM EST (#137643) #
It's interesting how down on this trade so many people are because we had to give up Hudson, but the reality is you usually can't get a good player without giving up a good player.

Yes, that's usually true. But you can sign a good player as a free agent and you can make a trade where the other team is dumping salary. In both cases, you don't have to give up anyone good (ignoring the draft picks as FA compensation).

In this case, the Jays gave up someone good and cheap (who will remain cheap through his arbitration days because defense always goes undercompensated) and acquired a player being moved in a salary dump.

I'd have rather seen them dole out $10M (matching KC's offer) for the aged and injury prone Reggie Sanders, and gain an immediate RF upgrade. Far less money, deals with a positional problem, doesn't exacerbate the 3B/DH clutter issue.

Chuck - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:24 PM EST (#137644) #
Interesting to note that Glaus had his best season in 2000 when he was in a lineup full of mashers. Three other guys with 35+ HR, another with 25 HR and a .400 OBP

Are you implying causality?

VBF - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:28 PM EST (#137645) #
Mylegacy, I'd like to hope that the increase in ticket revenue and all those luxury box/merchandise/etc revenue streams pick up with a contending team in the next couple years. With the increase in salary already as a direct result of owning the stadium, Rogers has made a promise to the Blue Jays that their revenues will come back in the form of payroll.

I can only hope that we can field a playoff team in the next two years to generate such revenues. Even if we stay extremely competitive, but not making the playoffs, attendance will see increases and payroll will remain in the 75 million range which is still good. However, if we have any dreams about staying players in the free agent market for the next few years, we need the extra revenue from the playoffs, which will in turn bring us payrolls of 90+ million dollars.

Bottom Line: Go to as many games as possible.
Mylegacy - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:30 PM EST (#137646) #
Arm vs. range?

How good does an arm have to be for that guy to be as good as the guy with better range?

I think the answer is positioning. A la Cal Ripkin.

If the board believes that Hill should get the shot at short, you'll all be happy to know I won't stand in the way. I think Hill is a very bright guy and won't embarrass as a SS.

In a way, Adams better range will make him more like O'Dog at 2nd and his weak arm won't be such a factor.

I'm warming to the idea.

Think I'll have another eggnog... now where did I put the rum?
Newton - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:32 PM EST (#137647) #
What was the Jays record with and without Hudson last year?

Jordan - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:36 PM EST (#137648) #
The best position for Glaus on this team is DH. The Jays now have four third basemen, and they have to clear out at least two of Koskie, Hinske and Hillenbrand in order to make the roster and the payroll balance out. I'd rather see Koskie or Hillenbrand start at third base than Glaus for defensive purposes. So we can't fully evaluate this deal until we know which other players are dispatched and what (if anything, and I wouldn't expect much) they bring in return.

Glaus was not acquired for his OBP. The Jays will have a lot of OBP in the three slots ahead of him. He was brought in to be something the team hasn't had since Delgado: a legitimate power hitter who can unnerve the opposing pitcher. (And for all that, Glaus' OBP totals the last five seasons have been .367, .352, .345, .355, and .363, which are certainly better than slightly above average.) Essentially, Glaus is 20 HRs and 60 walks per season better than Hillenbrand, and that's a major upgrade for a team that desperately needs power.

Hudson will be missed, in so many ways -- his defence, his on-field and clubhouse presence, his community work. The Jays will, without question, be a poorer defensive team without him. But I'm also pretty certain that, no matter how objective we try to be, Jays fans do overrate him. Aaron Hill should be his equal as a hitter this year, and will outperform him with the bat, at minimum salary, for 2-3 more years after that.

I still suspect that Hill at SS and Adams at 2B makes more sense defensively, but if that's the case, the Jays will make that move sometime this year. The specific middle infield alignment, at this point, doesn't concern me. If it's really a problem for the pitchers, Roy Halladay will walk into Ricciardi's office and make the point clearly.

It's a good trade, because it addresses the Jays' key need going into the season, just as acquiring Johnny Damon met the Yankees' key need. It's a tough deal to swallow from a fan's point of view, but I do believe the club is better now than before the deal, pending the disposition of the surplus infielders. We all said that the Blue Jays needed to take risks this off-season: they've done just that, in spades.
Mylegacy - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:36 PM EST (#137649) #
VBF, I think you're right.

I read a while ago that Ted was trying to bankrupt the American company that owned Skydome becasue they wouldn't sell it to him. (That's a mangled paraphrase of what I read...Ted, PLEASE don't sue me!) In the same story they implied that if Ted owned Skydome and we had a REAL team he'd be prepared to "finance" what it takes.

If we contend this year I expect Ted to give JP about an average of 80 to 90 mill in the next 3 year package. NOW, that would be a very merry Christmas!
robertdudek - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:36 PM EST (#137650) #
You have 4 veteran players for 3 positions (Koskie, Overbay, Hillenbrand and Glaus). None of them will be happy to become part time players which means that, barring a serious spring training injury to one of them, one of them will be traded.

Hinske is either going to be cut outright or given a bench/platoon role, so there is your 200 AB that you mistakenly gave to Koskie. One of the four mentioned above is going to be traded - I'll let you guess which one.

Meanwhile, if either Hill or Adams goes down to injury there is currently NO ONE in the organisation capable of being a competent every day middle infielder.

This trade has overloaded the corner infield depth while dissipating middle infield depth completely. Meanwhile, the outfield and backup catcher remain significant worries.

If this trade isn't one of a series of moves to rebalance the team, then it is awfully hard to see how this helps us at all.
Geoff - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:38 PM EST (#137651) #
Interesting to note that Glaus had his best season in 2000 when he was in a lineup full of mashers. Three other guys with 35+ HR, another with 25 HR and a .400 OBP
Are you implying causality?
No, no, no, man. The trendy term is virtuous circle. Surely you'd agree there is a situational effect on hitting, and that the other hitters in the lineup set those situations and everybody gives unto others, quid pro quo.

It's there, it's unquantifiable and it's unpredictable. It's almost not even worth talking about.

But getting back to the VORP projections, I'd like to see some stats on how well a previous year's production is a prognosticator for the following year? Any stats on the fluctuation from year to year of your average player? Seems to me that as much as you may project from past performance, it's less reliable to do that than most would like to believe. Unless you're gauging Albert Pujols, of course. Then you might as well expect an increase in performance.

Mylegacy - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:39 PM EST (#137652) #
Jordan, I think you're right on too.

I definitely am going to get that eggnog!
Chuck - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:43 PM EST (#137653) #
I think the answer is positioning. A la Cal Ripkin.

I'm not sure if you're suggesting that Ripken made up for either a lack of range or arm via his positioning skills. Ripken played a very deep shortstop because he had a terrific arm. As such, he got to a lot of balls in what appeared to be an easy fashion, not requiring the highlight reel gymnastics of shortstops who played shallower.

I'm not sure that Hill could play so deep. I'm very sure Adams couldn't. I see Adams' defensive upside the same as Eckstein's. A shallow shortstop to compensate for the absence of a gun. Making the plays on what balls he does get to. That's his upside, and he's nowhere near that now.

R Billie - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:47 PM EST (#137654) #
The Jays played 30 games without Hudson last year so there may be sample size issues but their record without him was 14-16. Most of that was in September with Hill playing in his place.
R Billie - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:50 PM EST (#137655) #
The Jays were 10-12 from September 9th to Oct 1st when Hudson was out for an extended time.
Chuck - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 02:56 PM EST (#137656) #
No, no, no, man. The trendy term is virtuous circle. Surely you'd agree there is a situational effect on hitting, and that the other hitters in the lineup set those situations and everybody gives unto others, quid pro quo.

Actually, no I wouldn't, not without evidence.

DepecheJay - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 03:08 PM EST (#137657) #
Can anyone say,,, clubhouse mutiny??

A very hypocritical move by JP in my mind. In one hand, he benches Rios for not hustling and talks about how important clubhouse chemistry is.

Then he trades Hudson after players CLEARLY didn't want O-Dog being traded, thus basically pissing at the notion of Hudson being the most important part of the Jays clubhouse, the glue if you will.

Let's hope for the sake of the Jays that Vernon is the pro that he is about it and doesn't stir up any trouble. If he did, I'd be behind him 100%. The players have a right to be pretty damn upset about this.
Chuck - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 03:11 PM EST (#137658) #
Players on an 80-82 team hardly have a right to decide who stays and who goes. They'll survive this, especially if they start winning. I think fans make too much of clubhouse leaders and clubhouse cancers. The game is played on the field.
koanhead - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 03:17 PM EST (#137660) #
I'm a little disappointed to see Hudson go, but I think Troy Glaus' power will more than console me.

Ricciardi's offseason moves have made me very excited to be a Jays fan. From what I've seen so far, I've no fear that I'll be disappointed with however he sorts out the corner infielder surfeit. I was down on the Hillenbrand deal last winter and that worked out to my great surprize.

I'm not convinced that this Jays' team is a legitimate challenger for first in the East, but I know it is a much better-balanced team than I've seen in a long time. The pitching staff is far and away better, from the first guy in the rotation to the last guy in the pen, than any staff the Jays have run out there in recent seasons. The outfield scares me a little -- I see it as weak offensively; if I were a praying man, the names Rios, Johnson, and Cat would be appearing in prayers at least twice-daily. I'd still like to see one more tough out added to the lineup (wishful thinking, I know -- just me wanting a sure thing) but as it stands, if Glaus stays healthy, and the rest of the offence improves slightly overall from last season, we have a good chance to see October baseball.

Yes, there is risk involved in all the moves made to this point but I think that risk is calculated and necessary.

2006 is going to be fun to watch.

Chuck - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 03:19 PM EST (#137661) #
This sounds like 1992. How could the Jays let Dave Winfield walk. He was the heart and soul of the team. The veteran leader. Blah blah blah. We're not fans any more.

Then Paul Molitor took his place. And the team kept winning. And everyone forgot about Winfield.

People have short memories. Nostalgia over one player's role on a sub-500 team is a little over the top.
Craig S. - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 03:30 PM EST (#137662) #
Reading the comments some have made about Hudson, you'd think that the Jays just traded some established superstar, and not that they were receiving one in this deal. I like Hudson a lot, and he was fun to watch in the field. Still, there's no comparison between what he and Glaus, respectively, bring to the everyday lineup.

As for how good O-dog was in the clubhouse, I'd only say that chemistry doesn't win championships. It makes for a more pleasant work environment and can help confidence, but I think I'd take talent and ability anyday over a bunch of average guys who get along real well.
VBF - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 03:33 PM EST (#137663) #
Can anyone say,,, clubhouse mutiny??

If you're going to say that, you're making the assumption that everyone in the clubhouse are are bad clubhouse people which is *totally* not the case. What as happened is that 24 good clubhouse people lost one very good clubhouse player. The leader is still Vernon Wells, and both he and O-Dog are chips off one another. I don't think any were particularily pleased with losing Orlando, but the current roster is mature enough to take it like a man. They know how close they are, and they're not going to let something like this ruin it.

If you're going to give Orlando the God-like status that you're giving him, you have to realize that the time he spent with the current roster should be enough to make the team mature enough to handle this situation.

And I have my entire faith that Vernon Wells will maintain the excellent clubhouse. This isn't pre-school nor the Philidelphia Eagles.

Mylegacy - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 03:36 PM EST (#137664) #
DepecheJay, aka Dave.

First of all, it's a pleasure to know the Jays actually have at least ONE fan in New York City!

However, me thinks thou protests too much.

"Clubhouse mutiny??" "A very hypocritical move by JP in my mind." "Let's hope for the sake of the Jays that Vernon is the pro that he is about it and doesn't stir up any trouble."

JP has been consistent. He said he'd have to be blown away to trade O'Dog. Consider him blown (in a nicest baseball metaphorical way). I guarantee Vernon is phoning his buddies saying, "WOW, lookee who we got!" Assuming Vernon is the type of guy that says "lookee".

We need at least ONE BAT that can scare the begeejuice out of pitchers. We've got him. AND, don't forget that 6'3" 240 Lb. shortstop/gorilla he brings with him.

By the way, the eggnog is de-lic-ious! Next drink I think will just be the rum. Eggnog's too fattening.
Lefty - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 03:41 PM EST (#137665) #
Glaus is a stud and now Vernon can be the straw that stirs the eggnog.
JayFan0912 - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 03:44 PM EST (#137666) #
I think the reason why people are so upset at this deal is the fact they don't realize what glaus's contribution to the jays would be. Glaus, put 37 HRs on the board while recovering from shoulder surgery (and some knee problems), and has a career high of 47. He takes the walk, and should protect wells, and cash in many of the runners left stranded on the bases this past season by the likes of hinske, koskie, and hillenbrand (late in the season). I think he is definately a better value than thome, who cost the chisox their CF, and two pretty good pitching prospects -- oh yeah, and he came off an injury plagued season in which he looked like he is done (35 years old).

Glaus is 28, a year older than hudson. And while hudson was very important defensively, this team was going nowhere without a home run threat in the middle of the lineup. It's hard to score lots of runs when you are a station to station baseball team, which isn't very good at stealing bases. The jays high average in runs scored is due to lopsided victories, and periods (late july comes to mind), when the entire team was running on all cylinders. In a HR deprived team there is no room for slumps, which is why the jays crashed and burned in august.

I would now look at ways to get rid of both hinske and hillenbrand. IMO, hinske is a lost cause, and the team has to find someone willing to negotiate the sum of money the jays must pay to get rid of him. Hillenbrand (perhaps paired with rios) should give a nice return ...
The Bone - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 03:45 PM EST (#137667) #
My Top Ten Opinions/Predictions:

1) Aaron Hill will outperform the O-Dog with the bat in 2006 and beyond

2) Aaron Hill will play 2B and Russ Adams will play SS

3) Aaron Hill's defense at 2B will be closer to the O-Dog's exceptional level of defence then it will be to the league average - that is to say he will be solidly above average

4) The clubhouse will be fine - any talk of a "mutiny" is ridiculous

5) Hinske will not be anywhere near the 2006 roster

6) Troy Glaus will start the year as the 3B...However, he will either a) revert to his pre shoulder injury form of above average defence or b) be the DH by June 1st

7) The 25th spot on the roster will be a platoon mate for Hinske...we currently have that in Shea but he's too expensive for that role and wouldn't be happy in it anyway

8) Payroll Math: 80 million (current payroll) - 10 million (Dumping Hinske + Shea) = 5 million for a) paying someone to take Hinske, b) getting a platoon mate for Koskie

9) The Infield Defence will be as good in 2006 as it was in 2005...Adams will improve, Overbay will be a significant improvement on Hinske, Hill won't be nearly the downgrade from O-Dog that most think and either Glaus will be good again or Koskie will be at 3B and as good as he was last year

10) Troy Glaus will be a freakin AWESOME hitter!

Mylegacy - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 03:46 PM EST (#137669) #
Lefty, right on bro'!

I was just thinking this is my bestest Christmas ever!

OK, so I had a lousy childhood. (not really)
MatO - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 03:50 PM EST (#137670) #
The way I see this is that the Jays have added Glaus in his prime and replaced Hudson with Hill. I think that Hill will be a much better hitter than Hudson, probably even this season making the position a wash at worst. What's not to like?
TamRa - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 03:50 PM EST (#137671) #
It's really rather strange that a guy who played 149 games last year, and more than that in 4 of the previous six years, is constantly huaranged as being an injury risk.

Any of you guys remeber Koskie's last 149 game season?

Or Cat's?

Glaus hit better as the season went on last year too. There's no more reason we should worry about him as an injury risk than any of scores of other major leaguers.

IMO, some people are simply scared to make a move. I wonder if JP had dealt Hinske for Miguel Cabrera someone wouldn't be here complaining.

Baseball involves risk. Every team that succeeds takes major chances to get there. It's the nature of the beast. But me down for one who's not content with a "safe" 80 win team.
Mylegacy - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 04:01 PM EST (#137672) #
Mato makes a good point...

We traded Hudson and Batista for Glaus, Santos and Hill.

I'll do that trade EVER day of the week and twice on Sunday.
TamRa - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 04:18 PM EST (#137673) #

"Glaus and Hudson were within 3 runs of each other overall in 2005, accoring to Baseball Prospectus. What I find interesting is Glaus' offence (43 runs above replacement) is only 1/2 win better than Hudson's defect (37 RAR). The totals are Hudson 53, Glaus 50."


However true that is, it's not like wqe go from Hudson to zero at 2B. Assuming it's Hill (and it ought be Adams) who plays 2B, then you have a guy that's noteable worse defensively but still presumably above average who is also a better hitter.

So the real question is do you have superior value with Glaus + Hill in the line-up than with Hudson + Shea.

I've not looked it up but my instincts say that's a net gain of several wins.

In other words, it's not relevant if we got the better of the D'Backs...i think the deal was largely a wash - it was about each of us trading from a position of strength.

Where's the wrong in that?
Lefty - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 04:19 PM EST (#137674) #
I made most of my comments on the last thread when this deal came down. I'm pleased to see so many here have summed them up so nicely. But a couple things.

If Glaus is waiving his no trade to Toronto with exception to re-ajusting for payroll taxes, that is just huge.

This is a guy who last year picked his city to work and for him to come the Jays says alot about the direction of this team and perhaps Glaus's desire to be part of a winner.

Also I realy hope we never again have to hear from JP and Bauxites that whoa is we, nobody wants to play in Canada sniff sniff. I've never bought that BS lock stock and barrel. No one wanted to play here because the team was without positive direction more than they didn't want to play in a foriegn country.

Some will recall I would never be described as a Ricciardi booster. I promised this board I would with hold criticism until last trading deadline then gave him a further free pass to see what he would do with this offseason. On his recent contract extension I asked why, when he still had two years remaining.

Well I am still not going to be a booster, but I will say I am super impressed with his wheeling and dealing. I like every move he has made the past 6 weeks. There is no doubt this is a significantly better team, barring a level crossing collision. Still on JP. Its going to be pretty hard to believe anything he says to be true in the future. The man has no compunction for either fibbing or making a comment and doing the exact opposite. Time and time again. So NFH, be warned about saying, "JP said ...."

Living in Vancouver (AAA & westcoast broadcasts) I have seen alot of Troy Glaus and had him on my AL roto teams for four seasons. Simply put we are going to love this guy. Those that say he is a defensive liability will be pleasantly suprised. His shoulder and knee are better. And he's young. Glaus was a huge kid. People like him have to grow into their bodies. I would go so far to say his career years still lie ahead, not behind.
melondough - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 05:01 PM EST (#137675) #
Not sure if this has been posted yet but is reporting that one of the pieces other than the physicals that need to be addressed is if and how much of the salary differential Arizona will pick up.

Here's the link:

Wow that would make it easier to keep Hillenbrand and deal Hinske while assuming some of his contract.

If we are able to keep Hillenbrand, then our bench (depending on weather a lefty or righty is opposing us) would become:

-Koskie(or Hillenbrand)
-Cat (or Johnson)
-Would there be any room for Griffin?

This assumes that on our 25 man roster we have 5 SP and 7 RP pitchers (leaving 9 starters and 4 bench players).

Do most teams go with 13 hitters or would it be 14 with 6 RP?

It would be interesting to know how our 4 man bench would compare to our main playoff competition: NYY, Bost, Oak, Minn, Ana, CWS, Cle. I think a good bench (a guess) can make a 3 or 4 game difference in wins which may mean the difference in making the playoffs.

Myself, I don't concern myself much with Balt, Tam, Det, KC, Tex, or Sea.

Geoff - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 05:26 PM EST (#137676) #
WoW! The D-backs might send the Jays greenbacks as well as Glaus & a good prospect?

I thought the Jays were getting Glaus on the cheap already, presuming he's healthy enough to play at least 125 games/season for three more years.

If the Jays are getting paid, they must be giving up more, or the right of players to make a trade demand while in the middle of a multiyear contract is driving down prices.

Anyhow, how do the D-backs win organization of the year while making trades like this? According to this article, give former Diamondbacks General Manager Joe Garagiola Jr. a lot of credit.

The award, presented annually at the winter meetings, honors the major league organization that produces the greatest number of player awards, including players of the month and the year, minor league All-Stars and the Topps major league Rookie All-Star Team.
and now I think the new guy is determined to dismantle and recalculate the budget expenditures. Purge the splurge.
melondough - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 05:40 PM EST (#137677) #
With respect to our 4 bench player from my earlier thread, it would be nice to replace Quiroz with Piazza. However that seems unlikely since I highly doubt JP would be willing to pay what surely will be $6 million + for a bench player and occasional catcher. Any idea what Piazza is asking for?

Thought it would be an interesting excerize to compare Piazza to Zaun defensively over the pst three years:

Piazza % of base stealers caught/FPCT:
2005: 13.7%/.997 (101 games caught)
2004: 20.9%/.982 (40 games caught)
2003: 28.0%/.982 (64 games caught)

Zaun % of base stealers caught/FPCT:
2005: 22.6%/.990 (132 games caught)
2004: 27.7%/.987 (97 games caught)
2003: 32.4%/.975 (45 games caught)

Though Zaun caught 132 games last season, it is interesting to note that his throwing % has dropped considerably each season. Prior to coming to Toronto, he caught 60 games or more only twice:
2004:95 (TOR)

Are the Bluejays geniuses or is Zaun really only a 40-80 games a season catcher. If he is, they may be smart to consider Piazza (though looks like a significant downgrade throwing out runners) or Molina before they are gone.

To make financial room (assuming they still need to pick up an OF) they would definately need an $80 million budget, probably would need to trade Hillenbrand and hope they could dump Hinske without much cost obligation.

melondough - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 05:59 PM EST (#137678) #
As a comparison, Molina had superb defensive numbers (yes we all know he can't run):

B.Molina's %age of runners caught stealing/FPCT
2005: 31.3%/.996 (105 games)
2004: 26.1%/.995 (89 games)
2003: 44.4%/.995 (117 games)

Wow, I would take Molina's bat and his defence and still put up with his lack of running ability. Without him or atleast a decent backup (Quiroz is a project at best), we are in big doodoo if Zaun gets hurt.

Andrew K - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 06:27 PM EST (#137679) #
On reflection, I think this trade is okay. Goodwill to all men, even General Managers who trade away the fan favourite.

Happy Christmas to everyone!
Glevin - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 07:42 PM EST (#137680) #
Just to drive everyone nuts, the Jays now have 1 American black (Wells) and 2 or 3 Latin player (Chacin, Rios, Quiroz). When J.P. took over, the Jays had Delgado, Bush, Cruz, Stewart, Mondesi, Batista, F. Lopez, Alerto Castillo, L. Lopez, Wells, Fernandez, Loaiza, Escobar, and Pasqual Coco. I hated the White Jays thing when it came out, but I am finding it increasingly odd how the Jays never trade for or sign non-white players. Look at the players, all of them, acquired in the last two years. (Jan 1, 2004) Ryan, Burnett, Overbay, Glaus (maybe), Koskie, MacDonald, Myers, Menenchino, Hillenbrand, Huckaby, Koch, Schowenweiss, Frasor, Whiteside, Downs, Chris Gomez, ERIC CROZIER (33 Abs!), Chad Hermanson, Terry Adams, MIKE NAKUMARA (25.66 IP), and Ryan Glynn. If you look back even further, it doesn't change. J.P. has only acquired one significant non-White player in his entire time as GM in Batista (Unless you include Aqualino Lopez) while he has let go of, or traded players including Delgado, Loaiza, Hudson, Escobar, F. Lopez, Izturis, S. Stewart, Jose Cruz, and Batista all of whom are now important parts of other teams. Let the tirades begin. I just find it very strange. I mean, look even at who the Jays target and they don't get (Giles, Clement, Wilkerson, Mench, etc...)
Jonny German - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 08:01 PM EST (#137681) #
Glevin, some of us take racism very seriously and find unfounded allegations of racism to be the equal of racism itself. If you want to accuse Blue Jay management of racism, come right out with the word, and name names, and don't do so lightly.
greenfrog - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 08:15 PM EST (#137682) #
Gotta be careful with these ad hoc hypotheses. Better do your homework.

For example, lists the top 10 free agents for 2005. Nine of them (including BJ and AJ) are caucasian, so far as I can tell. Furcal is the exception, and we definitely didn't need another SS. Similarly, JP has expressed interest in Sanders and Molina; we might have been able to get the former if the market value for half-decent OFs wasn't so high. If you want to get arch, you might argue that JP also shipped Bush, Jackson and Gross (three white guys) for Overbay (one white guy).

Before making any sweeping claims, you should look hard at JP's management record with Oakland and Toronto, and do it comprehensively, carefully, and with a realistic view to context (who was available on the trade and FA market, what JP's needs and budget constraints were in any given year, sample size, etc). Even then, I think you'd have to have pretty conclusive evidence before making such a claim.
Joseph Krengel - Saturday, December 24 2005 @ 08:16 PM EST (#137683) #
Why is it presumed that the decline of black or latino players on the Jays is a result of racism when those same communities, and baseball analysts at large are discussing the catastrophic decline of Black baseball players nation-wide? Because it is more interesting to imply racism I guess, because there is a theory that is widely publicized and non-contreversial, with a strong correlation to the facts which is being entirely ignored.
Lefty - Sunday, December 25 2005 @ 02:15 AM EST (#137684) #
Nice one Glev, Merry Christmas to you too!
Mike Forbes - Sunday, December 25 2005 @ 10:23 AM EST (#137687) #
Sergio Santos is hispanic. ;)

Merry Christmas to you all.
Pistol - Sunday, December 25 2005 @ 01:01 PM EST (#137692) #
JP better retract that Ricky Romero pick too.
andrewkw - Sunday, December 25 2005 @ 01:36 PM EST (#137697) #
from rotoworld : The Pirates did make a bid for Troy Glaus last week, though they couldn't beat Toronto's offer for him.

Perhaps they'd settle for one of Hillenbrand, Koskie, Hinske.
BrockLanders - Sunday, December 25 2005 @ 02:34 PM EST (#137702) #
We're only 4 months away from "The Adventures of Troy Glass and Lyle Overpay." It will be must-see TV.
Chuck - Sunday, December 25 2005 @ 02:57 PM EST (#137706) #
Here's hoping that the lump of coal in Glevin's Christmas stocking was black.
subculture - Sunday, December 25 2005 @ 03:06 PM EST (#137710) #
I don't think Glevin was necessarily implying anything, other than that the Star writers are probably debating publishing a follow-up piece called "The (even) Whiter Jays".

If they do, I'm going to cancel not only my subscription, but those of everyone I know (yes, I'll impersonate people if I have to).

The most hilarious point was one person wrote into the Star and asked why the staff was 'whiter' than the Toronto population, including the Jays.
westcoast dude - Sunday, December 25 2005 @ 03:52 PM EST (#137715) #
Having just spent a most enjoyable morning bringing myself up to speed courtesy of Batter's Box on the Troy Glaus trade, I feel much better about it. Thumbs up, Troy. This could be the start of something good.
Good for Rios and Quiroz for playing winterball and Working On Some Things. Prediction: when Morpheus pitches a no-hitter next season, GQ will be behind the plate.
Jacko - Sunday, December 25 2005 @ 04:01 PM EST (#137716) #
from rotoworld : The Pirates did make a bid for Troy Glaus last week, though they couldn't beat Toronto's offer for him.

Perhaps they'd settle for one of Hillenbrand, Koskie, Hinske.

And I hear they have a rightfielder who can hit that they are interested in trading (Craig Wilson)...

Jacko - Sunday, December 25 2005 @ 04:31 PM EST (#137718) #
Anyone remember Tom Evans?

He's still bouncing around minor league baseball, and decided to play winterball this year in Venezuela. And he's having a nice season. 17 HR and 50 RBI in 172 AB.

Not suggesting the Jays give him a shot, but hopefully he gets another shot this spring and eventually makes the majors.

I love baseball in different languages. Home Runs seem much more exotic when they are called "Cuadrangulaires".

Does anyone know where Rios is playing this winter? I could not find him in the the Venezuelan or DR leagues.
jamesq - Sunday, December 25 2005 @ 06:24 PM EST (#137722) #
I read Rios was playing in Puerto Rico with the Cagua Criollos.
Dave Till - Sunday, December 25 2005 @ 08:58 PM EST (#137729) #
I remember Tom Evans. He was always a good player, but couldn't stay healthy: he kept diving for balls and injuring his shoulder. My prediction: he'll do that again.
Original Ryan - Sunday, December 25 2005 @ 11:44 PM EST (#137734) #
The most hilarious point was one person wrote into the Star and asked why the staff was 'whiter' than the Toronto population, including the Jays.

The Blue Jays were the last team in the major leagues to have a player with "Ryan" as either his first or last name. It wasn't until the team's 25th season, when Ryan Freel made his debut, that it all changed. In recent years, the name Ryan has become a bit more common on the Blue Jays roster, but clearly the team once had a bias against players with that name.

I wonder why the Toronto Star never picked up on this? Perhaps it was because the team never showed a bias against names like "Baker" and "Griffin" -- two names that made their Blue Jays debuts in the early days of the franchise.

Geoff - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 01:15 AM EST (#137735) #
The discrimination, Ryan! And I'd better notify Mr. Baker that there is a sad lack of Geoffs in the history of the franchise.

At least none that have made the big club. If you know of any, please add them to this list. Perhaps there was a minor league player named Geoff?

At least it would be hard to fault JP for shipping Geoffs or Ryans out of town. But if he had the opportunity to acquire Geoff Jenkins and passed it up, I'd be FUMING!

HollywoodHartman - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 11:15 AM EST (#137741) #
Blair's latest is up. Although I believe you need to subscribe to view it...
Mike Green - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 11:17 AM EST (#137742) #
According to the Star, the deal has not yet been done. Money is still in issue. In related news, Larry Walker's agent indicated that if his neck injury heals, he'd consider coming to an American League team to DH and play the field sometimes.
Pistol - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 12:03 PM EST (#137745) #
For what it's worth, Bob Elliot wrote that the trade will become official after today's phyiscal for Glaus.

Geoff - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 12:23 PM EST (#137746) #
ha! Larry Walker too?

Might as well counter our scary injury threat with enormous depth. If J.P. adds Walker too, we may officially attach the bandwagon to this gravy train because it would seem everybody wants to come for a ride.

Soon George Bell will turn up to coach, heck, maybe the Rocket will come back, bring the kids? ha!
Geoff - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 12:54 PM EST (#137749) #
Re: the new Blair story

I believe you do need to have subscription access, BUT... somehow I'm able to get it without access.

Anyhow the gist of the story is that Blair loves J.P. but looks at why others don't, and the deal is done, signed sealed and delivered to the commish.

Make no mistake: The deal is finished, the papers are nestled all snug in the commissioner's office and it would have been announced officially by now were it not for Christmas.
Joe - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 01:21 PM EST (#137751) #
Search on Google News for "Jeff Blair," and you get "It all comes down to making the Jays better," which works when you click it from Google News, but not when you just click that link here.

Mylegacy - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 01:21 PM EST (#137752) #

$210 million, three years = $70 @ year.

05 = $50
06 = $75
07 = $85

07 works, just fine.

The only way it's gonna work in 08-10 is if Mr Rogers Neighbourhood pony's up some of his extra billions. The only way that is going to happen is if we fine Bauxites, and many of our ilk, GO TO THE GAMES!

Fortunately, we, and our ilk, WILL!

I expect Teddy Baby will allow AT LEAST $240 Mill over 08-10. But I'm praying to all the gods I can think of to make it $260!
VBF - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 01:56 PM EST (#137753) #
For someone who really wasn't ever and still isn't the greatest and most knowledgeable of baseball fans, I've noticed a definite genuine care and willingness to get involved on the part of Ted Rogers.

His committment to the team, his Steinbrenner-esque 'emergency' meeting he called with the players before the last game of the season, and his participation in the BJ Ryan signing really shows that he doesn't just want to open his wallet and let Godfrey and JP do the work, but that he wants to be involved too.

In one year, this organization has gone from a forgotten franchise to the toast of MLB. Let's keep the momentum coming.

jamesq - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 02:01 PM EST (#137754) #

When Teddy upped the budget last February, the looney was at about .80 cents to the US dollar. It now stands at .85.

$75 Million US at .80 equals $93,750,000 CDN
$75 Million US at .85 equals $88,235,300 CDN

Therefore, depending on whether they hedged or not, there's over $5,000,000 CDN (US $4,250,000 US) in savings due to the rising dollar. Wouldn't it be nice if Ted let the budget expand along with the rising looney.

The Bone - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 02:04 PM EST (#137755) #
The Blair article intrigues me. Not only would Cat be easy to move, he could likely fetch a decent return. Also, I believe, offensively, Hinske, with the same benefit of platooning with Reed that Cat enjoyed, would outperform the Cat in 2006. Obviously, none of us can speak to Hinske's ability in Left Field, but Cat is just one example of players making a successful transition from infield to outfield.

I'd support moving Shea and Cat - I just have a sneaky suspicion that 2005 will go down as Frank's last good year
Nick - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 02:34 PM EST (#137758) #
Count Dayn Perry among those who does not like the Glaus deal:
R Romero Vaughan - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 02:42 PM EST (#137759) #
One angle I haven't seen mentioned on the $210m budget is the simple time value of money.

A three year budget spread 50/75/85 does not equal the same amount in present value terms as 70/70/70.

Not only do you get the notional interest form the $20m you haven't spent in year one but the money is simply not worth the same by year 3 due to inflation.

In real terms, having only spent $50m in year one we should really be getting $215 or $220 in total.

Not sure if Ted sees it that way but we shall see.
krose - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 02:56 PM EST (#137760) #
Interesting that Perry builds his case for a Jay's regression, as a result of the Glaus trade, but fails to mention Hill's status as a replacement. Also, although he does not explicitly say that Glaus will become the everyday third baseman, that appears to be his assumption. Hill should be a "good" replacement for Hudson, and Glaus will not be allowed to drag the team defence down as long as Koskie is with the team.
melondough - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 03:37 PM EST (#137761) #
According to our very own TSn, it looks like it will be made official at 10am tomorrow.

Welcome to Toronto Glaus. Is it time to start thinking of a name for the meat of the order yet?
VBF - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 03:41 PM EST (#137762) #
I've heard they call him the G-Force, but I'm sure we can do better.
melondough - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 03:51 PM EST (#137763) #
It would be nice to use the first letters of each name. Lets see the meat will likely be:
Overbay, Wells, Glaus, Koskie and either Hill, Hillenbrand or Hinske (an H none the less). If you want to include the top two hitters we can add Adams and Cat (just for another vowel!). So we would have:
O,W,G,K,H (& an A and C if you want). For those that are bored good luck. I can't figure this one out.

I thought I would share an interesting point of view from a considerably disgusted DB fan:

Re: What Arizona GM was thinking (Glaus)
Santos was the kind of prospect that if delt, should have been the CENTER-PEICE of a deal for pitching. Arguing that we have a logjam of prospects??? Gime a break. Glaus himself should have netted Hudson and Batista, and Santos could have been packaged for an actually DECENT starting pitcher. We now are not only without Glaus (which isnt the part that BUGS me) we are without a potentail star and trading chip. Santos's inclusion in the deal was potentially the stupidest minor leauge inclusion in a deal i have EVER SEEN. All of you talking about how Santos was blocked by Drew (and maybe Upton), his future wasnt at SS anyway! He most likely would have converted to 3B or LF. To say a prospect with the versitility of Santos is blocked by other prospects is naive. Again, bottom line is we are without our offensive leader (whom we will be sending CASH with), AND more importantly a stud prospect who was one of our major bargaining chips. You dont INCLUDE a major bargaining chip as a THROW IN!!!!!!!!!!

We really did get hosed, and it'll show next year.
Jonny German - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 04:12 PM EST (#137764) #
I thought I would share an interesting point of view from a considerably disgusted DB fan

The "interesting" part is debatable, but what we have to insist on is that you give credit where credit is due - that is, a link to wherever these comments come from, and a small passage rather than a full quote.

Mick Doherty - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 04:15 PM EST (#137765) #
Ah, nicknames ...

I'm afraid the first names of Vernon, Lyle, Aaron, Russ, Gregg, Eric, Frank, Alexis and Troy, assuming Cat in the OF and Hinske at DH, leaves us with:

V[ery] LARGE [and] FAT

Maybe that refers to team batting average or win percentage or somesuch?

einsof - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 04:31 PM EST (#137766) #
Mike Forbes - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 04:50 PM EST (#137768) #
Hmmm.. So, if the deal if now confirmed do we get an Official "Troy Glaus is a Jay" thread?
Mike Forbes - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 04:51 PM EST (#137769) #
My bad.

Is* instead of the second if.
VBF - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 04:52 PM EST (#137770) #
By breaking the rules, an anagram of the first names of the players Mick included will give you:


JayFan0912 - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 04:54 PM EST (#137771) #
The only way this trade turns sour for the jays is if hill/adams can't cover ss/2b or if glaus gets injured. Glaus IMO is the right handed equivalent (even better than) of adam dunn -- he strikes out less, but doesn't walk nearly as much. To think that you could get Dunn for hudson and batista is just silly, but obviously, it was good enough to get glaus. With a bunch of on base conscious players at the top of the lineup, wells/glaus at 3/4, and overbay batting 5th, I think the jays could be top 5 or top 3 in runs scored in the AL. Outside of Boston, New York, Chicago, Texas, and Cleveland it's hard to make a case any other AL team has a better lineup.

I hope that the jays will play glaus primarily at DH, mainly to reduce the chance he'll get injured. He could play 3rd and 1st here and there, giving a break to koskie and overbay.

Hill last year seemed uncomfortable at 2B ... not because of range, but balance. He had problems recovering after dives, and looked out of balance when turning the double play. Hill playing SS , and adams covering 2B might improve the infield defence, as adams had no such problems, and in general, looked pretty smooth until he threw the ball.

Flex - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 05:03 PM EST (#137772) #
If you use the last names for 8 of our likely starters:

Adams, Hill, Overbay, Glaus, Wells, Koskie, Hillenbrand (or Hinske), and Catalanatto ...

You get "Hog Whack"

Which if you think of Toronto as Hogtown, kind of works. Tried to figure out a way to get Zaun in there, but couldn't.
RhyZa - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 05:13 PM EST (#137773) #
On the contrary, a couple of other D-Back fans over at Primer were hoping it would be Santos once a prospect was assumed to be heading our way... I guess they are pretty confident that he won't live up to his high billing.
timpinder - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 05:15 PM EST (#137774) #
Nice article by Jeff Blair. He mentioned Hill at 2B, and Blair is usually "in the know". I thought it would make more sense defensively to have Hill at SS and Adams at 2B, but it doesn't look like that's going to be the case. Oh well.

I would have Overbay hit 3rd, Glaus 4th, and Wells 5th. Overbay is a better hitter than Wells IMO and his stats suggest he's much more likely to get on base ahead of Glaus than Wells is.

Anybody read anything about the projected lineup with the inclusion of Glaus?

It's going to be interesting to see what J.P. does with his extra 3B/DH. I'd be happier if J.P. got some insurance at C over the likes of another hitter like Wilson. If Zaun got hurt, it's Quiroz or bust right now.
Ryan C - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 05:16 PM EST (#137775) #
Hmmmm possible 1 - 5 in the everyday batting order:
Adams, Overbay, Wells, Glaus, Catalanatto. Re-arrange the letters and what do you get?

HippyGilmore - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 05:36 PM EST (#137776) #
Wells, Overbay and Glaus in the middle? Pestilence, plague and death upon your baseball team! It's the Wrath Of God!
einsof - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 05:41 PM EST (#137777) #
The Fort Worth Star Telegram is reporting that Hillwood is signing with Texas for 4 years & an option for a 5th year--He takes his physical tommorow & then its official--
The Red Sox lonely Xmas continues--I almost feel sorry for them..
--PS-- I didn't know which thread to post this under..
TA - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 05:43 PM EST (#137778) #
That's a good one. Mark down one vote for "Wrath of God" please.
einsof - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 05:44 PM EST (#137779) #
RhyZa - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 06:03 PM EST (#137780) #
although I must say everywhere else I've read up on him, most are still bullish on his prospects.
Nick - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 06:24 PM EST (#137782) #
Here is the link from the Blue Jays' website saying that Glaus is in Toronto, took his physical today, and will stay overnight for the press conference tomorrow morning.

nicton - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 06:43 PM EST (#137786) #
No mention of dollars switching hands.

If the D-Backs use some dollars saved to sign J Upton, it makes sense. Otherwise, I don't get including Santos...
Lefty - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 06:49 PM EST (#137787) #
That was a great article, thanks for the tip Joe!
Mylegacy - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 06:53 PM EST (#137788) #
Boston ALSO loses out on shucks!

Boston wanted to do several things this off season:
Sign JP Ryan, aw shucks
Trade Manny for Glaus, aw shucks
Keep Johnny, aw shucks
Oh well at least Theo can get them out of the jam, oh shucks!!

On the batting lineup;

Koskie/Hillenbrand (whichever one is left standing)

I know a lot of people have Overbay batting 2nd. I think that's a mistake: Cat was 301/367/451 Reed was 269/332/412 and Overbay was 276/367/449

Since Overbay is slower than molasses in January I think we bat him further down where he can knock in runs not near the top where he can't go first to third and will hit into all sorts of double plays.

Gentlemen, what sayeth you all?
HollywoodHartman - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 07:00 PM EST (#137789) #
I've read that the Milwood deal could be 5/$60M. At least nobody will complain about the AJ signing now...
The_Game - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 07:04 PM EST (#137790) #
Ron - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 07:21 PM EST (#137792) #
Once again Boras delivers.

If I'm a good player and I'm heading into FA, there's no other agent I want than Scott Boras.

For all the people that like to complain about Boras (fans, media, MLB execs) he still manages to find homes for his clients.
timpinder - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 07:27 PM EST (#137793) #
How about,

L Cat (.360 OBP)
R Hill (Good eye and some pop)
L Overbay (Double home Cat and Hill)
R Glaus (Round tripper with Overbay at 2B)
R Wells (Think twice about walking Glaus)
L Koskie (More protection)
R Rios
L Adams (Pesky #8)
S Zaun (Pesky #9)

(Assuming Hillenbrand's traded and Hinske's on the bench)

Looks good.

5 yrs and 60 for Millwood? Burnett deal looks even better.
Lefty - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 07:35 PM EST (#137794) #
Millwood is yet another player the Red Sox were targeting but didn't land. I assume their plan was that if they could land him they would be in a better position to deal existing pitching such as Arroyo or Clement for center field help such as Seattles Reed.
Mike T - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 08:23 PM EST (#137795) #
Boston also offered Clement & Arroyo for Overbay only to be outbid by JP.
zaptom - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 08:35 PM EST (#137797) #
Does anybody know if the press conf. for Glaus will be televised/cybercast?
melondough - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 08:41 PM EST (#137798) #
I love the new lineup ideas. Although I realize that we can't always have our cake and eat it to, it would be great if JP could go all the way and upgrade RF and backup catcher (I don't think it needs to be a star player).

Accoding to Rotoworld Alex Rios is batting .190 in 42 AB in the Puerto Rican League. They also note that he has a 14/2 K/BB ratio. Though I must say that 42 ab's really doesn't tell us much.
Geoff - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 10:10 PM EST (#137801) #
proofreader to the rescue....
If you use the last names for 8 of our likely starters:
Adams, Hill, Overbay, Glaus, Wells, Koskie, Hillenbrand (or Hinske), and Catalanatto ...
Flex, you're missing a catcher and an outfielder there. Were Hillenbrand or Hinske going to fill one of those roles?
Boston wanted to do several things this off season:
Sign JP Ryan, aw shucks
Who's this JP Ryan?
Geoff - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 10:17 PM EST (#137802) #
hmmm... another thing confuses me on Mylegacy's post
Since Overbay is slower than molasses in January I think we bat him further down where he can knock in runs not near the top where he can't go first to third and will hit into all sorts of double plays.
Who cares how slow Overbay is in January? Let him work off the eggnog...
and by the way, you're cut off   ;)
Mylegacy - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 11:01 PM EST (#137803) #
Hic* Hic* wot eggnog?

Actually what I meant was he (Overbay)is so slow if he gets on base ahead of Wells and Glaus he won't be able to take the extra base or score from first on a double.

AND, who is JP Ryan? I think he's AJ's brother.
Barfieldsgun - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 11:32 PM EST (#137804) #
Its a damn good thing the fans aren't responsible for the
difficult decisions a GM must make.
If you cannot see even the slightest bit of improvement
after the Glaus deal - your clearly too emotionally
attached to the 'player' you love (Hudson)despite the needs
of the team as a whole. Get over it. The Hudson era has come to an end.
We all loved Orlando. Time to move on.
Do you want to get better or wallow in third
place or worse for the tenth season in a row?
Or take a shot and pull the bloody trigger while you have a shot for the first time in a decade.

subculture - Monday, December 26 2005 @ 11:51 PM EST (#137806) #
On that note, leaving emotions aside, if either Adams or Hill can't live up to expectations (or are seriously injured), how hard will it be for the Jays to come up with a good middle infielder?

Is there likely to be one available via trade or farm system that we'd be able to acquire (without weakening our pitching or newfound offense)?

I'm looking fwd to Glaus anchoring our lineup, but really hope to see Koskie manning 3b, otherwise our IF defense could be much below average..

Another question - would Arizona have taken Russ Adams instead? They wouldn't need to move Counsell to SS if they had...
BrockLanders - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 12:01 AM EST (#137807) #
Troy Glaus will have to prove to every Jays fan thats he worth the escarole that he will be paid. End of Story. Revisit this thread sometime in August.
rtcaino - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 12:08 AM EST (#137808) #
I haven't really chimed in on JP's off-season, but I must say he has impressed me. Going into this off-season many were prematurely critical of JP. In fairness, many were prematurely willing to offer praise. To be even fairer, many were withholding judgment on JP until after this off-season. To steal a line from Jerry, many of us were form Missouri on that one… you know, the “show me” state. This was his "Show me” off-season. The one that he had been working towards and he delivered what he said he would.

He said he wanted a number two starter and two bats. Well he got all of those things and a wicked awesome closer. Obviously his track record isn't perfect. And one could definitely knit pick this move or that. It is valid to say that we really haven't added two bats since Shea may be on the way out.

Although he still has some maneuvering to do to achieve his budget. I think it is now reasonable to assert that he has done a good job.
Thomas - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 12:18 AM EST (#137809) #
The press conference should be picked up on Sportsnet and quite probably TSN and The Score, unless they are previously committed to something live.

I saw it was going to be held tomorrow, but I never saw a mention of the time. Did I just miss it in the MLB article or has a time not been announced?
rtcaino - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 12:32 AM EST (#137810) #
Wilner mentioned 10 am... He also said we were 12-18 wins better now.
Matt - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 03:58 AM EST (#137812) #
I'm delighted all this happened. But, I hope this doesn't result in Hillenbrand's departure. This is a guy who was steady and healthy thru all of last season.

Would he be an all-star if he didn't fulfill a league requirement? Probably not.

But the fact of the matter is, guys like that do not grow on trees. I say we have to find a way to keep that bat in the order.
MattAtBat - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 04:44 AM EST (#137813) #
Come get your articles, kiddies!

"Glaus officially a Jay today" from The Globe and Mail (Jeff Blair)

"Batista set for return to D-Backs" from the Arizona Republic (Nick Piecoro)

"Hudson isn't bitter at Jays" from the Toronto Star (Allan Ryan)

Read them all yourselves, but here are some important points.

  1. Blair's article says the Jays' payroll projects to 73 million for 2006. How'd they do that? All along we've been under the impression that the Jays would have to dump salary to get to 75 mil. And the Glaus trade should add about 3 million. Have all the so-called experts been off?
  2. Hillenbrand is less likely to be traded than we all thought because Gibby has lobbied against trading Shea's right-handed bat.
  3. Glaus listed Toronto as a location in his no-trade clause not because of the cold weather but because of the (old) turf. He agreed to waive the no-trade clause upon being convinced of the improvements when FieldTurf was installed in the Rogers Centre.
  4. According to the Republic, the Jays will get a little bit of help financially from the D-Backs (around 1 million for 2008) for tax equalization. Which means to me that the money isn't really for the Jays, it's for Glaus. How nice. However, Blair says no money will change hands.
  5. Hudson isn't bitter. He has known it was coming for close to a month, according the Star. Seems this trade has been in the works for a while but there were so many stumbling blocks until last Thursday.
  6. Santos was not on a list of the D-Backs "coveted" prospects submitted by Josh Byrnes to Ricciardi. JP was permitted to choose any minor league player who was not on this list. However, perhaps Santos was a convenient choice for the D-Backs because there was no room on the D-Backs 40-man roster. (The Republic) anyways.
  7. JP has contemplated playing Hinske in the outfield. Some days, he thinks it's a good idea. Other days... uh, not so much.
  8. Glaus got a new no-trade clause to replace the one he just waived.
  9. Ticket sales are up 15% at this time compared to last year.

    For your own edification, read the articles!

HollywoodHartman - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 09:46 AM EST (#137814) #
Ok... I woke up for the pc. Anyone know for sure if it's on TV?
greenfrog - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 09:55 AM EST (#137816) #
Can we start a thanks-O-Dog-for-the-memories thread? I'd like to see him get some props on his way out.
SK in NJ - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 09:59 AM EST (#137817) #
Will this PC be available online? I'm listening to the Fan on their site, and they didn't mention the press conference.
melondough - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 10:00 AM EST (#137818) #
The fan had mentioned just 5 minutes ago that there is no official time for the press conference but it will be later today.
Kingsley Zissou - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 10:02 AM EST (#137819) #
From Blair's article:

Glaus has been told privately that he will play third base for the Blue Jays, and if that's the case, the club can be expected to solve the logjam by moving out one of its lefty bats (Eric Hinske, Corey Koskie or Frank Catalanotto.) Manager John Gibbons has urged Ricciardi to hang on to righty-hitting Shea Hillenbrand, and Ricciardi has all but taken him off the trade block.

That's some of the best news I've heard regarding the logjam. Keeping Hillenbrand is VITAL, especially if he backs up his comments from a few weeks ago about the new swing and his HR predictions.

Thomas - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 10:10 AM EST (#137820) #
That's some of the best news I've heard regarding the logjam. Keeping Hillenbrand is VITAL, especially if he backs up his comments from a few weeks ago about the new swing and his HR predictions.

What reason do we have for thinking he will back up his comments? Did we expect Batista to live up to his 50 save prediction? Wells to become a 30-30 man last year?

HollywoodHartman - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 10:11 AM EST (#137821) #
So I woke up for nothing...
CeeBee - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 10:14 AM EST (#137822) #
As much as I like the Cat he just doesnt have enough pop for a fulltime corner outfielder and since he will be a FA next year anyway I'd prefer to see some combination of Koskie, Hinske or the cat traded for a corner outfielder. Keeping Koskie would be ok if he gets enough at bats at 3rd/dh/1st as he could pretty much share dh and back-up 1st and 3rd with Hilly depending on injuries and opponents starting pitchers.
MatO - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 10:16 AM EST (#137823) #

I suspect Arizona wouldn't have taken Adams instead and the Jays would have been reluctant to part with him since he'll come cheaply for the next 2 years.

I hope that in case of a major injury that Ryan Roberts will get the call up and that MacDonald is not a long-term solution. I guess it all depends how Roberts does at AAA this year. Reports are that he plays 2nd base adequately and he has some pop. If Adams were the one injured then I hope they'd move Hill over to SS with Roberts to 2nd, assuming Adams and Hill play SS and 2nd respectively.
greenfrog - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 10:16 AM EST (#137824) #
Any idea who the Jays might deal Koskie/Hinske (or maybe Shea) to?

Just from this site, it sounds as though the Pirates and Twins are possibilities. Here what the Baseball Analysts (free) have to say:

"Simply put, this trade -- while filling important holes for both teams -- just opens the door for more moves. For Toronto, Glaus leaves a logjam at DH between Corey Koskie, Eric Hinske and Shea Hillenbrand. The latter is likely on his way out, as I expect trade talks between the Twins and Jays to resume shortly. Expect Toronto to come out asking for Jesse Crain, and in the end, be left with something resembling Kyle Lohse and a prospect."
MatO - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 10:21 AM EST (#137825) #
I may have missed something but who's at 3rd for the Dodgers? Isn't Kent going to 1st?
Gwyn - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 10:25 AM EST (#137826) #
MatO - The Dodgers signed Bill Mueller to a two year, $9.5 million deal a couple of weeks ago.
Jacko - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 10:27 AM EST (#137827) #
The Dodgers signed Bill Mueller to play 3rd.
VBF - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 10:29 AM EST (#137828) #
Thomas, Shea Hillenbrand has always come across as a 'no-nonsense' kind of guy. He's a quiet and usually modest worker who just goes out and does his best everyday. So when he comes out and makes a bold statement such as that, it definitely catches my attention and I give alot of credibility to that statement as supposed to Batista or Vernon*.

It's sort of like in Major League II when that rookie catcher stands up and says that he'll play, even though he's never been successful. It's different as supposed to a star player blowing off steam.

*No disrespect to Vernon, I think star players need to set challenging goals to influence the younger players to push themselves more.

MatO - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 10:30 AM EST (#137830) #
Oh yeah. Thanks.
Elijah - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 10:31 AM EST (#137831) #
Bill Mueller is at third for the Dodgers.

Just off the top of my head, where Koskie or Hillenbrand could go:

Angels have McPherson and Kotchman at 3rd and DH right now. The Jays don't need either of those two guys and Stoneman won't trade them anyway. But Shea could play third or be a full-time DH for the Halos. The difficulty with Stoneman is that he's always been reluctant to trade his minor leaguers. Unfortunately, for whatever reason, the Angels have been reluctant to play them in the majors as well. But that's a possible fit for either Koskie or Hillenbrand.

The Padres, as far as I know, don't have a third baseman with the trade of Burroughs and the departure of Randa. They could use a little more right handed power around Giles and Klesko. Unfortunately, the Padres don't have a whole lot to trade right now except for relievers. And they're not going to trade Linebrink having dealt Otsuka.

The Twins have Batista playing third and we all know (and now the Softbank Hawks know) how that'll work out.

I'm sure there are others but I can't think of any right now. And to be honest, it's going to be very difficult to trade any of them because for many teams unless the Jays take on salary in return or get little back (except maybe in the case of Hillenbrand). So look for teams with overpaid outfielders but a need for infielders and you may find a fit.
melondough - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 10:35 AM EST (#137832) #
Kingsley I agree.

Who then should be dealt among Koskie, Hinske, and Cat?
My vote is Koskie first, Hinske second. I can't see how we could afford to deal an OF.

I would like to say that if this were to happen I would really hope Hillenbrand could play some games at 3B but after looking at his performance there I am not sure that it would be much of an upgrade. Maybe then Hinkse is the only guy that makes sense to move. Although I will say again that I am scared about what kind of hitter he may turn into if we trade him + maybe as JP eluded to, he can become an OF.

Defensive #'s:
Koskie 9.68FPCT, 2.80RF (76 Games at 3B)
Hillenbrand 9.54FPCT, 2.49RF (54 Games at 3B)
Hill 9.49FPCT, 2.95RF (35 Games at 3B)
Glaus 9.46FPCT, 3.01RF (145 Games at 3B)*
*In 2005, tied for the most errors at 3B in the ML's.

Over the holiday's I did some looking into Glaus' defensive numbers from 2005 and found the following:
(thanks to the in-laws for taking the kids for the day. I enjoyed doing this).

-He had 24 errors of which 14 were throwing errors and 9 were ground ball errors (I could not find the 24th error)
-12 of the 23 games in which an error was made caused at least 1 unearned run (11 of these 12 games ended in a loss)
-22 unearned runs due to Glaus errors (half of which occurred in just 3 of the games)
-7 wins and 16 losses in games in which Glaus made an error
-2 of the 12 games in which at least one unearned run was scored caused the run differential leading to a loss
-10 Home errors & 13 Away errors
-6 errors in innings 1 through 3
-7 errors in innings 4 through 6
-10 errors in innings 7 through 9 (twice in the 9th)

Conclusion: With 40% of his errors coming with the glove (as opposed to the throw), Overbay may help cut down some of the errors but how significant it will be is hard to say. Having made almost half of his errors at home, it doesn’t seem like Glaus benefits much from learning his home field (for whatever that’s worth). Almost 45% of his errors occur in the final third of the game (innings 7 through 9). Since I do not know the %age of his Total Chances during this part of the game, I cannot say with much validity weather having him on the field late in the game adds extra risk of him making an error. Actually there would have to be a large # of constraints analyzed in order to make such a claim. In depth analysis aside, would it make sense to put Koskie out there in the last third of a close game and risk losing Glaus’ bat?
The Bone - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 10:36 AM EST (#137833) #
If I were a betting man, I'd bet Koskie is on his way out. Moving Koskie would lessen the pressure on Glaus (he wouldn't be looking over his shoulder at a significantly better 3b)and if Gibbons is as gung-ho about keeping Shea as Blair claims (and I don't often doubt Blair) then I think he has to get the lion share of the at-bats at DH in order to keep him happy. Koskie wouldn't be happy only DHing against the toughest righties, but Hinske at this point seems willing to play any role, especially if he is getting ABs by picking up an outfield glove.

Koskie won't bring a return of significance and I think J.P. is done with bringing in roster players anyways

If were in J.P.'s shoes tho, I'd trade the Cat. The three are somewhat similar hitters but Hinske is younger and Koskie in his worst season still hit righties about as well as Cat in one of his best seasons. Moreover, Cat's value will never be higher (coming off a relatively injury-free year) while the other two's values will never be lower. There are issues, however, with trying to keep all 3 of Koskie, Hinske and Hilly on the roster and keeping them happy with the few LF and DH abs to go around (especially if Hinske is the only one of the 3 who can play LF).
Nick - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 11:26 AM EST (#137834) #
Shea Hillenbrand will not hit 30 HR next year. The Jays should move people based on salary/budget restraints, defense, offensive production, and attitude. I would want Ricciardi fired if he takes player's predictions into account when making personnel decisions. (He doesn't.) Every year players are "in the best shape of their careers," "lost X pounds to improve agility/durability," "gained X pounds in muscle to improve bat speed/power." Talk is cheap.

I'm not saying keeping Hillenbrand is a bad move. I'm just saying what he tells a reporter is irrelevant. He is the most versatile player defensively and the most durable player of the excess corner infielders. But that's also why he'd have the most trade value.

Moving Hinske to the outfield is .... interesting. That's the nicest term I could think of. Who knows how he'd perform, but if Toronto's strength is pitching, I don't think it's wise to start being cavalier about defense, especially after the loss of Hudson.

I expect to see a lot of John McDonald in the late innings of ballgames as a defensive replacement for Adams or Hill.
Arms Longfellow - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 12:04 PM EST (#137840) #
Yeah, the "best shape of his career/adjusted his swing" etc. talk is a long standing sports cliche during training camps in every sport. I always tell myself not to fall for these things, but every year I still get roped in sometimes only for nothing to happen once the season actually begins. The only time I've ever seen a claim like this actually make a significant difference that I can remember is when I heard about Andruw Jones slightly changing his swing last spring training, and, gosh, it sure worked. Hopefully Hillenbrand will be one of those "one in a hundred" guys.

It's funny because I clearly remember Andruw Jones ripping it up in training camp, then getting off to a horrendous start to the regular season, before eventually hitting a home run every damn day.
Mylegacy - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 12:25 PM EST (#137841) #
Take Glaus' 05 defensive numbers with a pinch of salt. The guy was playing with a bum shoulder and knee. He is better than he showed last year.

Koskie (IM[H]O) is far too brittle for 3rd now. He's a DH. We got LOTS of them! Trade him.

Hilly plays 3rd and 1st pretty good, keep him he's our everyday DH!

Hinske is the backup at 1st, 3rd and DH. He'll get at least 250 bats and be an OK left hand bat off the bench in the later innings.

One LAST comment on defense. We traded a 43rd rounder 2nd baseman for a 1st round short stop. The world HAS NOT ended!

So sayeth the scribe.

MattAtBat - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 02:10 PM EST (#137856) #
Some caller on The Fan said Cleveland is interested in Hillenbrand. I haven't heard this yet. Does anyone have a link?
MattAtBat - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 02:12 PM EST (#137858) #
The press conference is scheduled for 6:30 PM. (The Fan)
Barfieldsgun - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 03:01 PM EST (#137864) #
Wilner and Blair seemed convinced the Jays are a much
better club today than they were last week. This seems to
be the prevailing consensous from the articles and
opinions Ive read.
Wilner even went as far as to say the Blue Jays offense has
'drastically' improved with the aquisition of Glaus.
I'd have to agree.
Interesting to note that Blair is of the opinion that the
loss of Hudson's glove will be compensated by the upside
of Hill's bat. And while Hill won't be on the highlight
real as often as Hudson - he will provide solid defense
and the occasional webgem.
Again, I think most would agree with this.
The Jays infield - while not stronger defensivley in '06
will have improved significantly from an offensive
Dealing Hinske will cement this move even further and he
is movable according to Blair.
MattAtBat - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 05:32 PM EST (#137886) #
Lots of new info:

- Jays gave Glaus a PLAYER option for approximately the average annual value of the contract (around 11 million)

- Agreed to all sort of fine tuning with Glaus's contract. To cover the more expensive cost of his wife operating her business from Arizona, expanded no-trade clause, tax equalization, etc.

Just like with Burnett, JP feels the need to bend over backwards to accomodate these players. He obviously views acquiring them as a coup. I'm not sure how good this is, particulary with reference to Burnett's opt-out clause and Glaus's player option and no-trade clause.

Also, check out Blair's latest ( ). Sounds like the "clubhouse chemistry" will be fine, and all the talk of Orlando Hudson's departure disrupting that was outlandish.

Nick - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 06:25 PM EST (#137893) #
Hopefully, Vernon's comments in Blair's blog will put to rest the ridiculous notion of a clubhouse mutiny and Vernon coming to camp "pissed off." Baseball is a business and Vernon Wells and his teammates are professionals. While it is human nature to want to see your friends stick around, Vernon and others would not compromise their professional reputation by whining or dogging it on the field. If the Jays win like they expect, the "chemistry" will be fine because people are generally happy when they are winning.
Barfieldsgun - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 07:07 PM EST (#137918) #
Interesting poll on
The early results:

1) Which team will win the AL East in 2006?

66.2% New York Yankees

24.0% Toronto Blue Jays

8.2% Boston Red Sox

0.8% Baltimore Orioles

0.8% Tampa Bay Devil Rays

2) Which team do you think has more talent at the moment?

76.0% Toronto Blue Jays

24.0% Boston Red Sox

3) Which team got the better of the trade between Arizona and Toronto?

72.1% Toronto: Troy Glaus

27.9% Arizona: Miguel Batista, Orlando Hudson

4) Who is Toronto's most important offseason acquisition?

41.4% A.J. Burnett

29.0% B.J. Ryan

24.2% Troy Glaus

5.4% Lyle Overbay

5) What do you think of Toronto GM J.P. Ricciardi's moves this offseason?

74.5% He's aggressively putting together a roster capable of contending.

16.9% He's making decent moves, but they won't be enough to matter.

8.6% He's recklessly spending money for the sake of spending money.

6) Who will be Toronto's best hitter in 2006?

57.2% Vernon Wells

28.0% Troy Glaus

11.2% Lyle Overbay

3.5% Other

7) Who is most likely to be the third part of the 1B-3B-DH rotation with Glaus and Overbay?

49.7% Shea Hillenbrand

33.3% Corey Koskie

17.0% Eric Hinske

8) Is prospect Aaron Hill ready to play second base for the Blue Jays?

80.6% Yes, it's time to give him the job.

19.4% No, the Blue Jays need to acquire a veteran.

9) Which team do you think has a better rotation at the moment?

69.3% Toronto Blue Jays: R. Halladay, A.J. Burnett, G. Chacin, T. Lilly, J. Towers

30.7% New York Yankees: R. Johnson, M. Mussina, C. Wang, S. Chacon, C. Pavano

10) Given the moves by Boston, New York and Toronto, what should the Orioles do with Miguel Tejada?

57.1% Trade him for prospects; the AL East is too tough right now.

28.8% Keep him and hope for the best with a few more additions.

14.1% Trade him for proven veteran talent and try to contend.

Total Votes: 4,414

phifediggy - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 07:11 PM EST (#137919) #
you beat me to the punch barfieldsgun :-)

early results look good; seems to me like people are finally giving the blue jays some credit. of course, they're also saying that hillenbrand will be the most likely to stick around (which i wish were true but to most of us, it seems obvious that he will be the first one to get moved).

anyway, i can't wait for april, when the jays can start displaying the impact of these december transactions!
Geoff - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 07:23 PM EST (#137927) #
Add your vote to the aforementioned poll.
Geoff - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 07:32 PM EST (#137936) #
The press conference looks to be starting after a long delay.
Geoff - Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 07:51 PM EST (#137951) #
The PC is now over. Some notable quotes from J.P.
"We don't have to move anybody ... these guys have spots, our job is to find spots for the guys we have"
~~ on the roster's future

"We have some wiggle room left"
~~ on the budget

The Unofficial "Troy Glaus is a Jay" Thread | 273 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.