Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
According to the Boston Herald and the Toronto Star the Red Sox acquired Eric Hinske from the Blue Jays this evening.

The Star article says that the Red Sox will be paying the remainder of Hinske's contract this year, and half of the $5.6 million contract next season. The Jays will receive a player to be named later.

The official announcement will come after the league approves the trade since the Blue Jays will be sending cash to the Red Sox in excess of $1 million for part of Hinske's 2007 contract.
Hinske Traded To Red Sox | 210 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
China fan - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 12:17 AM EDT (#153192) #

  I'll repeat my comment from the other thread:

By trading a useful player to a division rival -- and one of the teams ahead of them in the wild-card race -- the Jays are effectively giving up on the season.  They're raising the white flag of surrender, and it's only Aug. 16.   What kind of message is this to the fans?   And to the players on the team?     How is this any different from Hillenbrand's comment that the "ship is sinking"?   JP is basically admitting that the ship has sunk.

    I'm sure that this move will be applauded by everyone who thinks that the goal of baseball is to save money, dump salaries, keep a low budget, and win praise from the accountants and bean-counters.   But what about fans who expect winning to be the goal?   How many seasons do we have to watch JP cutting budget and dumping salaries and saving money for some unknown future season when -- miraculously -- everything will fall into place?

Mike D - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 12:20 AM EDT (#153194) #
Frankly, I can't disagree with anything China fan just said.
Named For Hank - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 12:27 AM EDT (#153196) #

"What?  I've been traded?!  To the Red Sox?!"
Mike D - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 12:29 AM EDT (#153200) #

Silver lining:  I hope this will finally bring an end to the completely, numbingly insane "trade Wells" talk.  There is no longer sufficient outfield depth to do it, even if doing so -- WHICH MAKES NO SENSE, from either a financial or a talent perspective -- was once an option.

So long, Dude -- your attitude (these last two seasons in particular) will be fondly remembered.  Don't know if you'll play much, but it won't be fun facing your team as often as the Jays will.

js_magloire - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 12:38 AM EDT (#153203) #
This is also going on the premise that Rios breakthrough at the beginning of the year is legitmate.

I have no reason to believe why it wouldn't, but because he missed a month and lost 10 pounds, I can understand losing his timing and power at the plate, and in the field - he seems to be misplaying the ball.

Whle he may return to form in a little why at the end of the season -

I just hope its something he gets back at the beginning of 2007 lest this staph infection have robbed him of some much needed momentum.

Thomas - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 12:39 AM EDT (#153204) #
I realise now that I'll miss Hinske a lot more than I would have thought 12 months ago.

I'm also of the opinion that this move really can't be properly evaluated until we have a clearer picture of a) what the payroll will be next year and b) what JP plans to do with this money. The fact we're paying part of his contract next year means that JP must be able to improve the team with the money saved or must need the money so badly because of the payroll "mess" that it was worth trading him to save a couple of million.

Thomas - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 12:41 AM EDT (#153205) #
I also agree with the comments above: I think Lind will have a role on next year's team; I don't like trading Hinske to a division rival and we are gambling that Rios's improvement is legitimate.
Jacko - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 12:45 AM EDT (#153206) #
That solves the problem of finding playing time for Adam Lind next year.   Heck, they could probably bring him up right now without any risk of him becoming a Super 2 after 2008.  Though that leaves the Jays w/o a backup corner infielder.

Not sure why the Sox felt like they had depth problems at 1B/3B.  Maybe they are worried about Lowell and Youk wearing down during the stretch drive?

Good luck Eric!

Mike D - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 12:47 AM EDT (#153207) #

You're right, of course, Thomas.  But I listened to WWJP tonight and it was very depressing.  The phrase "considering the realities of our payroll" was used to qualify not only his specific plans for upgrading particular problem areas, but also a question from a listener as to how JP defined success for the Jays -- the World Series, JP said, might be nice, but "you have to consider the realities of our payroll."  It made my stomach crawl to hear him essentially concede first and second place in the East forever and ever.

Out:  "The 2006 Blue Jays!  We're finally ready to take on Boston and New York!"

In:  "The 2007 Blue Jays!  Pleasingly mediocre for a cheapskate organization!  (See also 2003 Blue Jays and 2005 Blue Jays.)"

Ron - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 12:53 AM EDT (#153209) #
Let me add to what Mike D said, a caller asked him about the whole "I could win with a 50 million dollar payroll" line. JP said it was true and he won 86 games with a 50 million dollar payroll. He did go on to say, he never said he could win the AL East with a 50 million dollar payroll.

I don't remember his exact words but he said something along the lines with how it's still hard to win even with a 75 million dollar payroll.

He also told the fans not to expect a big off-season spending spree like what he did last year with AJ, Ryan, Molina, and the trade for Glaus.

I get the sense the Jays will be bargain hunting this winter unless they can move a contract like AJ's.

Jacko - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 12:56 AM EDT (#153210) #
I just hope its something he gets back at the beginning of 2007 lest this staph infection have robbed him of some much needed momentum.

Speaking of staph infections, I wonder if it will eventually come out that Nixon's elbow infection (which he was hospitalized for) is a season-ending staph infection?  The Red Sox could have been downplaying the significance and nature of the infection to avoid hurting their bargaining position.

This also might explain why the Red Sox made the deal -- they need someone to take Nixon's place in RF against RHP (and maybe sometimes against LHP -- Wily Mo's defense out there makes Eric look like a Gold Glover).

Eric Purdy - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 01:00 AM EDT (#153211) #
I've got to say, I'm a bit surprised at the sheer volume of negativity in here. The Jays just opened up over $4 million of payroll room for next year at the expense of a platoon DH (and hardly a great one). I'd rather have this cash for next year and Adam Lind in my lineup, by a pretty fair margin.

Does it mean we're throwing in the towel for this year? Sure, but that's a reality that needs to be faced. Eric Hinske isn't going to be the difference between the Jays making the playoffs or not, because it wasn't going to happen even with him here.

slitheringslider - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 01:31 AM EDT (#153214) #
Come on people, what message does this send to Blue Jays fan? It sends a message that the management will do whatever it takes to make the team better, whether it may or may not go against what the fans want. Also, at some point, you have to look at the playoff races realistically. After that first homestand post all-star break, I gave the Jays a 2% chance of making that playoffs, after that 2-8 stretch, it was pretty much a nail in the coffin. As a GM, you can look at your team and say that, "We are 8 GB with less then 2 months to play, mathematically we are still in it, so lets do what we can to get there regardless of future consequences" or you can ask realistically, what are the chances that at least 3 of the Yankees, Red Sox, White Sox, and the Twins will struggle down the stretch and that the Jays will play .750 ball the rest of the way? You never want to give up on anything, but at some point, you just have to be realistic and make the best decision for the team going forward. Instead of looking at the Jays dumping salary because they are cheap, you can look as it as part of the money going towards Vernon Wells, or Lyle Overbay to a long term contract, or whatever. Blue Jays fans have long complained about Hinske but now that he is gone, they complain about the team giving up. No matter what you say, 5mil for what he is getting is overpaying for mediocrity. Adam Lind looked poise to take his spot next year; he is not profiled to be a star, but will be a similar type of player as Hinske.
chengy - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 01:45 AM EDT (#153217) #

Wow just an hour ago I was reading rumours of this...I should really just stick to this site :).

Anyway with Hinske, I think he's a great role player that winning teams need on the bench. I know he's had his struggles but he underservedly gets booed here all the time. I think they'll like him up in Boston. Going to misss those diving catches in right.

actionjackson - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 02:00 AM EDT (#153218) #
I will miss the Dude and I would like to recognize him for his attitude adjustment over the last couple of years. Great job Eric. The fact is that his contract was deadweight and we are now free of a part of it. If the Star report is true, we're free of more of it than I thought was possible. He was without a doubt not in the long term plans of the Jays and therefore, free up some salary space and maybe(?) get a semi-decent player as well. Yes, he's a useful role player, but he's not a guy that'll put any team over the top. Good luck Dude. It just won't be the same anymore when I hear a Linkin Park tune.
trent77 - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 02:14 AM EDT (#153219) #

I think there is a significant difference between what Hillebrand did 2 MONTHS AGO vs a GM trading an over-priced 5th outfielder/back-up infielder to free up $$$ for next year's budget.  Anyone who thinks that the Jays have a chance at the playoffs this year is delusional.  Unfortunately, teams with budgets cannot afford to have money tied up in players like Hinske and Schoweneheis.  I'm actually surprised that JP was actually able to get rid of Hinske-how many teams could possibly be interested in Hinske in any more of a role than he played in Toronto?  And at $5 million???? 

Unfortunately, baseball has come down to this-small/medium sized payroll teams have to get the most out of their budgets and cannot afford Hinske and Burnett type mistakes.  Everything has to go right for a team like the Blue Jays to actually make the playoffs with this type of budget.  And when a season doesn't go according to plan, moves like the Hinske and Schowenheis salary dumps are to be expected.

Jimbag - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 02:41 AM EDT (#153221) #
I underestimated Hinske this year. Not only did he hit well considering his limited at-bats, but he exceeded my wildest expectations defensively as well - we knew he could play third, but who could have expected his play in right while Rios was out?

The thing that impressed me the most about Hinske this year, though, was his attitude. He was asked to play a role that included significant time on the bench, and he accepted it without complaint (unlike others) going out and getting the job done when called on. Both Hinske and Zaun deserve credit for the way they handled the roles they were given this year.

He was a victim of simple economics - it's tough to justify shelling out over 4 mil for bench depth if Steinbrenner's name isn't on the cheque somewhere.

unclejim - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 05:00 AM EDT (#153223) #

A simple way to evaluate this and the SS trade is to ask yourself, would you be happy if JP signed Hinske and SS right now for the amount of money being saved and for a couple of PTBNL.  I think this board would be in uproar if we'd signed someone like Hinske for 3m next season...

To me Hinske has never shown anywhere near the form he suggested in his Rookie season and lets be honest, we've been wanting rid of him for about 3 years now and would've taken a bag of balls at the end of last season. As much as he's been a positive for the team this year we're not the kind of team who can afford to spend much more than league average for bench players. To compete with the Skanks and Pox we need to be putting most of our payroll into the starters, the players on the field. Not bench players or one out specialists.




andrewkw - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 06:10 AM EDT (#153224) #
The only way I see this move making sence is if next years payroll situation was so bad that salary needed to be cut just to give arbitration elligable players their raises.  Paying 2.8 million to have Hisnke play for the Red Sox is not worth it imo.  Or any team for that matter.  At 2.8 million Hinske should be worth what he is paid by the red sox next year.  Is it his fault he got the contract he did?  No.  One way to justify paying The Dude 5.6 next year is that if he and Vernon didn't get the contracts they did Wells would likely be earning more then 10 million in his final arbitration year anyway.

It's still sinking in but I think this is JP's worst move not in terms of giving up or anything like that but it shows how desperate he is save money.  If Cat is resigned for 2.8 million next year I'll certainly feel somewhat better but I don't think he will come back at that price. 

timpinder - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 07:14 AM EDT (#153225) #

This was a good trade (salary dump).  Lind will take over for Hinske for minimum wage, and now the Jays have about $12 million to spend on a starting pitcher and catcher next year.  We may hear about a Benjie Molina trade soon too, and that would free up even more cash.

I've noticed that some Jays fans tend to overvalue 'their' players, but how can anyone say the Jays are worse off with this trade?  Lind will take over for Hinske and may do a better job, and the extra money should help with signing a # 3 starter over the winter. 

Jim - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 07:23 AM EDT (#153226) #
They're raising the white flag of surrender, and it's only Aug. 16

Well I would like to see who they get back before I get too upset.  The stark reality is that there is really no way to catch 3 teams that far ahead of them.  The Red Sox have given away a lot of value lately in prospects without great returns, maybe paying half of Hinske's salary nets the Jays a B- prospect.
Dave Till - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 07:38 AM EDT (#153228) #
Since the All-Star break, Hinske is hitting .225/.313/.423, was mostly occupying a spot on the bench, and is being paid a fair bit of money. If the Jays can get anything useful for him, this was a good move.

However, I would be very unhappy if Rogers decided to cut back payroll for 2007. (And, to be fair, it's not clear that they are - they may just be making payroll room for better players to come in.) If the Jays are not seriously trying to overhaul the Yankees and Red Sox, why should we bother watching?

John Northey - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 08:14 AM EDT (#153230) #
Dave has a good point on the overall payroll.  The Jays will make more from attendance this year than last, they also are getting better ratings on tv (owned by Rogers thus more revenue directly attributable to the Jays even if it doesn't go directly to them via accountants).  Perhaps that was accounted for before putting in the $210 for 3 years.  However the Canadian dollar also skyrocketed during that 3 year stretch which also adds to the pockets and no one saw that coming.

So, if the Jays don't increase payroll long term I'd agree that the owners would appear to not be trying.  Hopefully Godfrey is fighting the good fight and is also pushing for expanded playoffs.  I may personally like the idea of shifting to 4 divisions with just division winners going to the playoffs (grew up with 2 divisions just the winners going) but realistically to compete with the other sports for fan attention MLB needs to look at getting 10-16 teams into the playoffs as many only see playoffs as success.

As to Hinske, how many before the season were saying 'dump him even if you gotta pay him'?  Many.  He is basically a left handed version of Hillenbrand who isn't as consistantly at 800 for OPS.  SS was an overpaid loogy.  Losing both does not weaken the front line of the team, just the backups and in the AL East as it is currently set up you need to have your front line healthy and backups are a luxury the Jays cannot afford unless Rogers really opens the pursestrings.  $4.6 million might be the difference between getting an 800 OPS DH and a 900+ OPS DH and that is big. 

As to the team this year, LF=Johnson, CF=Wells, RF=Rios, DH=Cat/Molina. 
Next year?  LF=Johnson, CF=Wells, RF=Rios, DH=Lind or free agent

If Wells is traded then we see LF=? CF=Rios, RF=Johnson, DH=?

LF and DH are the easiest positions to fill as defense is not vital at those slots.  Sluggers can be hard to find, but they are out there and if Wells is traded I suspect the Jays will get a masher in return.  Hinske was not an answer in RF or DH as he lost his job at 3B and 1B before.  I am not happy that JP has had to eat so much money lately as it shows poor decisions earlier, however I am happy he has learned to accept where he is and work the best he can with what is there now.  Lets hope Molina goes soon so as much payroll is available for 2007 as possible. 

Oh, and don't forget, in 1998 the Jays waved the white flag then went on a tear once the kids got a shot at playing.  Dumping overpaid vets doesn't always kill off a team.

CeeBee - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 08:18 AM EDT (#153231) #
I can't believe it. Half of you wanted to trade Eric for a bag of balls in the off season and now that he's apparently been traded for more than that the whining is getting worse. Geez, almost 5 million for a bench player is surely more than the Jays can afford given their payroll limitations anyway. I like Eric and always liked his attitude but the reality is that unless he gets 400 plate appearances he's probably overpayed on this team. Like someone else said, I wouldn't be surprised if Bengie is next to go. It's time to start thinking about next year and having a bit of room in the offseason to make a move or 2.
zeppelinkm - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 08:29 AM EDT (#153233) #
The Cat is hitting over .400 with runners on base. The Jays will win more games with him on their team next year then without.  I pray that the Jays resign him. You need clutch hitters to win. Need them. I think this deal just helps solidfy this issue - that they can't let Cat go.

JayFan0912 - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 08:34 AM EDT (#153234) #
I agree with john northey.

With these two moves the jays have an extra $5 Million for next year, and if they dump molina, perhaps they can stretch it to $6 Million. There is also the 3 PTBNL which might be useful in creating some depth. 

With this money, and whatever is left in the payroll, the jays have to fill holes in the rotation, catcher, and perhaps get an upgrade at SS.  For instance, these dumps could allow us to sign a guy like randy wolf and use what's left over to get someone like lugo.

BTW, I read comments earlier looking to dump burnett if you want to create payroll flexibility. I would choose glaus over burnett, he seems to be limping at the plate, for the entire season. And, every acrobatic/challenging move at 3B, is followed by wincing/limping/or a replacement coming in. I've never seen a player in as much visible pain for such a long part of the season.

js_magloire - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 08:50 AM EDT (#153235) #
Out of curiousity, how much would we have to east to dump Burnett? 8-12 million straight up for nothing?

If Glaus is so aching...then how come we dealt Hinske. It's ironic that now all of a sudden we have no depth at the corners, what with Hinske, Koskie and Hillenbrand gone.

This deal seriously limits our bench too, for pinch runners/hitters, for back up 3b...and also for the future OF limits our ability to trade Wells this offseason for something we better sign Cat. And who's our DH next year? Frank Thomas?

As well, it significantly helps the Red Sox. I am reading the Sons of Sam message board someone posted on the Schoe trade thread, and as they started out negative,as more details filled in they started to be really really happy about it, mainly because:

they can back up slumping Lowell at third, or platoon him with Wily Mo in RF, get a good bat vs. RHP off the bench, for a cheap price (2.8mil next year), what with Trot gone and all that. It helps their bench and hurts ours....they are thrilled about the money (perhaps we should have made them eat more?), but don't know about the move...but given Riccardi's tendency to get guys like Taubenheim or Wolfe in PTBNL, how can I be too excited if it strengthen's the Red Sox bench and weakens ours. It's also low risk high reward for them, as if Hinske does return to form, bashing 30 homeruns for them before the end of next season, then it'll be a big mistake.

truefan - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 09:29 AM EDT (#153237) #
I agree with those who say it's a good move for 2007.  We'd be paying him $5.6m next year, which is about 2 or 3 times more than he's 'worth' if he were priced today.  The fact that he has been paid much more than he is 'worth' has prevented us from being able to deal him for the past year -- and the best time to find a buyer is late in the year when a contender needs to fill a whole.  So now may be the only time to do the deal  With Rios back, Hinske wouldn't likely have had much impact in 06 anway. (I get the sense Hinske was playing sometimes primariliy to 'showcase' him for a future deal like this.)  This move will help us more in 07 than it hurts us in 06.  This move may not be a 'no brainer', but on the balance of probabilities, we should credit JP for recognizing that the multi-year deal for Hinske was a mistake, and moving on.
Bruce Wrigley - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 09:29 AM EDT (#153238) #

I think Lind will have a role on next year's team

I hope he will, but most rookies aren't ready right away.

I'm depressed.

This is a good trade for the Red Sox.

Mike Green - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 09:31 AM EDT (#153239) #
I hadn't given up on 2006 prior to this trade.  If Troy Glaus is forced to DH due to his knee injury, the backup is presumably Ryan Roberts.  The forgoing of depth does send a message to the team about management's view of their chances.

The overall impression left by the buying of the off-season and the selling of August is an organization where ownership and management are not on the same page.  I was very much in favour of the 3 year budget plan, on the basis that it would assist in bringing consistency and stability.  It doesn't seem to have worked out that way. 

I'll save my comments about Eric Hinske for the Gone But Not Forgotten thread coming soon.

Joanna - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 09:35 AM EDT (#153240) #

Loser teams dump salary.  Are the Jays going to be perpetual losers? Next year (not 2007, but an imaginary future date) will never, ever come. Maybe Hinske was expendable depth and maybe he cost too much.  But why am I imagining multiple homruns wrapping around Pesky's Pole?  And if  the Sox need pieces, division rivals shouldn't provide them with them.  Division rivals should should smell blood and gain on them.

Anyway, Eric, if it is true, I'll miss you, you big meathead.  I'll miss your new found hustle.  And your superman right field catches.  And those homeruns that are absolute bombs.  Your hard swings and misses.  I'll miss wondering if your getting kinda fat or if you are just a man tank. And the fact that you completely remind me of Ricky from the Trailer Park Boys.  But most of all, I'll miss your newly developed humility. Way to check that ego. 

Auf Wiedersehen, Dude!

unclejim - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 09:35 AM EDT (#153241) #

But Mudie, what you have to understand is that if we weren't prepared to pay this 2.8 million next year then it would be costing us 5.6 million next year to keep him (and 1.4m for the rest of this season).

This is money we have already spent, its not like Hinske is costing us 2.8 million from now on and we can choose what to do with him... He is already costing us 5.6. We spent this money back in 2003.

We have 2 options

1) Keep Hinske and pay 5.6 million next year and 1.4 this year (total 7 million).

2) Lose Hinske and save 4.2 million for next year and get a Player (PTBNL) in return.

<i>(from the Toronto Sun)

Red Sox are to pick up the remaining $1.4 million owed to Hinske this year and $2.815 million of the $5.6 million he is due next year.</i>

In effect the question you need to ask is would you trade a PTBNL for Hinske now and pay him a 4.2 million salary through to 2007 to sit on our bench. My personal answer is no.

If you want to pick fault, you can either lambast JP for signing Hinske to this contact back in 2003, or you can suggest he might have gotten a better deal from the Sox now... but for me, as much as this is a salary dump, its the right move. The Sox can afford 4.2 million for a bench player, we can't.....  Its that simple.

koanhead - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 09:39 AM EDT (#153243) #
Though the Jays season has effectively been over for a few weeks now, they are in much better shape as a team than they were at this time last year. The paring away of Hillenbrand, Schoeneweis, Hinske, Towers and Adams is, to me, a clear and welcome sign that management has few illusions about the roster makeup and the abilities of individual players. About the two most recent deals, I can only say that I applaud them. Hinske and Schoeneweis were not going to make any difference this season, nor are they irreplaceable for seasons to come. Whatever returns they bring, whether it be small cash savings or potentially useful players, at worst, only leave the team as good as it was without them; and, at best, slightly i mproves the team.

It is hard for me, as a fan, to give up on a particular season. But also, as a fan, I'm still excited and optimistic about the longterm potential of this ball club. There is a very good core in Halladay, Glaus, Ryan, Overbay, Burnett (I believe a lot of people are going to be pleasantly surprised by his next couple of seasons), Hill (he's no Chase Utley, but he doesn't need to be to help the Jays), and Rios (his first few months were not a complete mirage).

Reed Johnson is a useful part who is exceedingly likely to be having his career season this year -- he won't repeat his numbers next year but he should be a decent play in either left or right. As for Wells, I believe his value would be maximized by the Jays if they traded him this winter or at next season's deadline but I trust Ricciardi to make the call he thinks best for the team -- whether it be trade him, resign him, go to arbitration or let him explore free agency. Rios can play center, and Adam Lind and, eventually, Ryan Patterson are intriguing outfield options. It'll be nice to say good-bye to Molasses Molina over the winter, and look forward to another year of serviceable offense from Zaun while we see if Curtis Thigpen is for real.
Pepper Moffatt - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 09:42 AM EDT (#153246) #
Why do the Jays need money?  I mean, the Dollar has gone up from under 62 cents (January 21, 2002) to 89 1/2 cents (today).

We were told that every time the Canadian dollar fell a cent, the Jays lost 80 kajillion dollars.  Shouldn't the converse hold true when the dollar gains a cent?

If the Jays had as many wins as they have excuses, they'd win the pennant every year.

Pepper Moffatt - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 09:46 AM EDT (#153247) #
"I hope he will, but most rookies aren't ready right away."

Plus if Lind doesn't hit .400 immediately and make several spectacular defensive plays, he'll wind up in the perpetual young player doghouse that the Jays have had over the last few years.  It seems like if a kid has a bad fortnight, he's shipped back to Syracuse or relegated to the bench or forced to change defensive positions.
Mike Green - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 09:49 AM EDT (#153248) #
Evair Montenegro reported in the MLU thread that Davis Romero was called up from Syracuse.  It is confirmed on the official site.

I wish Eric Hinske well in Boston (almost all the time), and Davis Romero well in Toronto all of the time.

Ryan Day - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 09:49 AM EDT (#153250) #

This is a good trade for the Red Sox.

  Agreed.  I'm not entirely sure if it's a good deal for the Jays, but the Sox are getting a guy who can play a few positions and hit well against right handers for about $3 million. The Jays, on the other hand, do get that money off the books, but they're also paying a couple million for some Low-A 25 year-old outfielder.

  As for this season... it's been over for a couple weeks.  The Jays haven't been mathematically eliminated yet, but I don't see any miracles happening in the remaining weeks, nor any cataclysmic disasters for the teams ahead of them.

  Hinske's taken a lot of abuse, some of it deservedly, but the Jays got one great season and two useful ones out of him. And he always played hard, even if he didn't play particularly well, and did whatever the team asked him to.  It's unfortunate he'll be remembered more for the disappointments than the highs.

the mick - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 10:24 AM EDT (#153253) #
I admired Hinske's attitude this year, and he played well in spurts when given the opportunity. The Jays had to make room for Lind, who's looking ready for the challenge of the Show. The Jays playoff odds stand at 3% (per BP) so it's hard to imagine this is "giving up" on the season or sending a message. The Jays, the best they can figure out, are trying to be competitive both this year, and beyond.
Four Seamer - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 10:35 AM EDT (#153254) #

I'm in full agreement with Pepper.  The repeated excuses coming from Blue Jays Way and J.P.'s continual woe-is-me schtick is finally starting to wear a little thin.  All this bafflegab about how hard it is to compete in the A.L. East fails to explain why it is exactly that they also trail the Tigers, White Sox and Twins.  It's better to be third in the East than fourth in the Central.  If Ricciardi doesn't think Rogers is giving him the tools he needs to compete, he should resign.  As a fan, I would rather the Jays be helmed by a person trying to win, however incompetently, than a general manager who steers his team to respectable finishes, on budget.  If they - and I mean each of Rogers, Godfrey and Ricciardi - are not wholly committed to fielding a team which legitimately contends for championships - I will find something else besides the Blue Jays to occupy so much of my time and disposable income from now on.

I'm of two minds about the Hinske trade; it's unfortunate that they have to eat a large part of his salary, and it's doubly unfortunate that he's going to be a useful piece, this year and next, for a team ahead of the Jays in the standing.  On the other hand, since it's apparent that we do have to live with a Rogers-imposed budget, however arbitrary, wrong-headed and unnecessary it seems to me, it does create a little more flexibility going forward.

The problem, however, is that I no longer have any faith that J.P. has what it takes to take advantage of that flexibility.  I've long resisted the incessant complaints of the writers and pundits who've been on his case since Day One, mainly because they didn't like his attitude, and indeed have fairly consistently defended him against his detractors.   But it's increasingly clear that he's made only marginal improvements to the health of the organization over the course of his tenure here, and there's absolutely no reason to believe that any more improvements are imminent.

 Yes, perhaps kudos are due to him for recognizing that Hinske and Schoeneweis and maybe Molina are all sunk costs and it's best to move on and make the best of the situation, but he's the guy who signed these guys to these deals he now considers overly luxurious.  He's not getting out from underneath the bad contracts of his predecessor anymore - these are unforced errors of his own making.  At some point, the excuses need to stop, and responsibility accepted.

Anyways, best of luck to Eric in Boston.  He has his limitations, but he is a true professional who impressed me quite a bit this year and I look forward to the Gone But Not Forgotten thread. 

Adrock - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 10:50 AM EDT (#153255) #

Can someone with access to a spreadsheet and the relevant data post what the Jays' salary situation looks like next year, and beyond?

If dumping these salaries helps sign Wells, then it's definitely a positive move.  However, given the salaries already tied up in the Big 4 (Ryan, Halladay, Burnett, Glaus), it would seem that saving 4M over the next 1.2 seasons doesn't really help up in 2008 and beyond, the years when Vernon's extension would kick in.


AWeb - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 11:15 AM EDT (#153257) #
Forbes had the Jays making 30 million last year, and Selig et al can complain all they want, the actual baseball owners have absolutely no credibility anymore when discussing their own profit levels (faking losses? Ken Lay must roll around in his grave), so I tend to believe the estimate is in the right ballpark (pun intended). 30 milion profit from 136 million in revenue would make an oil company blush. That's a sickening profit margin, and I'm getting tired of hearing about payroll constraints at the current level. The strong dollar, the purchase of the SkyDome for a paltry 25 million, increased revenue sharing (one good thing about the Yankees), the huge cutbacks in the number of scouts, the unbalanced schedule (travel money saved)...the team makes a lot due to these things.

Hinske may have been overpriced for his role but he was a good player, and to give him away to a division rival, just to clear up some money? If Rogers et al want to treat the Jays as a money making machine, that's up to them, but I am allowed to hate them for doing it. And JP for playing along with it. Like others, I'm sick of hearing excuses from him. I see two likely possibilities about JP right now:

1) he keeps getting mixed signals from the higher ups about payroll increases, and is being a good corporate man by not blaming his bosses.

2) He's a terrible GM who has no idea how to build a team on a budget. When you have to keep dumping the middling slaries that you yourself signed, no matter how well you dump them, you've screwed up overall. And if he dumps Molina, that's just sad. It doesn't help anything for next year, means calling up Phillips, who has been less then great in the minors, and looks terrible to future free agents.

and I suppose 3) Payroll increases are coming again, and this will all make sense soon.

I've suspected 1) for a while, but I'm starting to fear 2). All while still hoping for 3).
Gwyn - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 11:16 AM EDT (#153258) #
There is a spreadsheet here:

Mike Green - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 11:18 AM EDT (#153259) #
Here's the data.
Thomas - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 11:22 AM EDT (#153260) #
Another side effect to this deal, particularly to him going to the Red Sox, is that if there's any truth to the notion that Beckett or other members of the Red Sox staff are tipping pitches or the Jays are stealing signs, Hinske is now able to share that knowledge with them. A minor effect, sure, but another reason why if the trade happened in the first place, Boston is not the preffered target. I have to assume they were the only ones to offer anything for Eric.
Pistol - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 11:33 AM EDT (#153264) #

If dumping these salaries helps sign Wells

I suspect it has no impact on Wells.  The Jays have been very public in their desire to re-sign Wells beyond next season.  This was before and after the last three trades. 

Next year the Jays have $59 million committed to Halladay, Ryan, Wells, Burnett, and Glaus (plus money for Koskie, Hinkse, Towers, Molina's buyout and the amortized bonuses of Ryan and Burnett).  Overbay, Rios, Johnson, Downs, and Frasor all are arbitration eligible and most of those will be tough to determine.  I imagine the Jays want to re-sign Zaun and that's not easy to figure (and if you were him wouldn't you want Molina's $5 million?).  Regardless the Jays will get up to $80 million pretty quick.

What saving this money might do is give the Jays a chance to re-sign Lilly.  Between Hinske, SS Loogy and Hillenbrand that's about $6.8 million.  Lilly looks like the generic 3 year, $21 million pitcher of the last couple years.

Pistol - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 12:33 PM EDT (#153275) #

I think people are underestimating where the Jays are.  For all the problems that exist they still have the 8th best record in baseball.  BP had them as the 7th best team this year as of Monday.

The problem, of course, is that 6 of those 7 teams ahead of them are all in the AL and they need to be better than at least 3 of those teams.  I don't think the Jays are that far away - it's just a matter of the pieces coming together at one time (mostly internal, and some external).

Being 7.5 games back of both the division and wild card, and the problems getting consistent innings from the starters, it makes sense to turn an eye toward next year.  I don't think the Jays have been 8 games better than these teams ahead of them for any 40 game stretch this year.  I don't see any reason why that would change now. BP's playoff odds have the Jays at less than one percent today

Mick Doherty - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 12:57 PM EDT (#153281) #
Yes, Catalanotto has played more than 90 games at 1B in his career already (mostly with Texas) and in fact has played quite a bit at both IF and OF corners. I think if Glaus needed a DH break that the Jays could do far worse than playing Cat at the hot corner for a few days or a couple of weeks. He's no Gold Glover -- I remember him as a 2B in Texas, which was an adventure -- but he would not embarrass himself. Another reason to keep him!
Marc Hulet - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 01:47 PM EDT (#153296) #
Hattig is the first player from Guam to ever play in the majors.
Pepper Moffatt - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 01:57 PM EDT (#153298) #
"Let me add to what Mike D said, a caller asked him about the whole "I could win with a 50 million dollar payroll" line. JP said it was true and he won 86 games with a 50 million dollar payroll. He did go on to say, he never said he could win the AL East with a 50 million dollar payroll."

JP must have a different definition of "winning" than the rest of us.

The Jays are on pace to go about 86-76 this year.  If they do so, over the 5 years JP has been here, the Jays will have gone 397-412, for a .490 winning percentage.  They'll also have had 2 winning seasons and 3 losing ones.

Does a .490 record sound like a "winner" to you?  JP's comment sounds like a guy who pats himself on the back for stealing 10 bags, while ignoring the fact he was caught 15 other times.
MatO - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 02:06 PM EDT (#153300) #
Honestly!  Why does anyone even pay attention to what JP or any GM for that matter has to say about the team's performance.  What do you expect them to say?  Every GM who doesn't win the the World Series has a ready excuse.  They will all cover their asses.  I suggest everyone not waste their time picking over what they say and concentrate on what they do.
Pepper Moffatt - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 02:12 PM EDT (#153301) #
Because they're the equivalent to the CEO of an organization.  If the CEO of Ford (Bill Ford) went on the radio and said that there's no way they can realistically compete with Toyota, and shareholders should be grateful because one quarter 3 years ago the firm turned a profit, I think it'd make headlines.

Mike Green - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 02:14 PM EDT (#153303) #
The Red Sox have announced  the trade.

Brian Cashman has had a very good year.  He wisely stayed out of the free agent market during the off-season, weathered the injuries to Sheffield and Matsui thanks to Melky Cabrera, filled holes brilliantly with the acquisitions of Abreu and Wilson, and seen his farm system go from hopeless to below average but productive.  It's not the first time that he has done this.  It's all well and good to decry the spending ability of one's opponents, but also acknowledging their acumen seems in order.

Mike D - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 02:21 PM EDT (#153305) #

But MatO, it does matter.  I agree with Moffatt entirely.

Consider these two philosophies, and whether it would influence how an organization would conduct its business going forward:

Option A:  "We're committed to winning on a budget, and within those constraints, we will spend as much money as necessary to reach a talent level with which we're comfortable."

Option B:  "We're committed to a low payroll while maintaining a somewhat competitive team, and within those constraints, we will jettison as much talent as necessary to reach a payroll level with which we're comfortable."

This offseason made me really, truly, sincerely believe that the Jays' organizational philosophy had shifted from B to A.  But Hinske to Boston is a B move all the way -- at least in tone, even if the actual addition of Hinske isn't so important to the Sox.  If the idea is to clear room to bring on players that will beat Boston one day, then it seems to work counter to it to trade those players to Boston.  And if the justification is, as J.P. is seeming to imply, "Come on, we can't beat Boston anyway," then why should I buy a ticket?

I love going to Jays games.  But Kansas City and Tampa Bay are the only other clubs in all of baseball with zero recent success and an outdated ballpark.  (Technically, Washington would count, but they just got baseball back last year.)  I refuse to call Toronto fans bad people for not coming out in greater numbers, if that's the red herring that's going to be offered as the reason why we'll never, ever, ever deserve to cheer for a winner.  An actual winner, not some hey-we-spend-less-per-victory type of winner.

MatO - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 02:43 PM EDT (#153307) #
And if Ford has a bad quarter does the CEO come out and say it was the result of my bad decisions or was it factor A or factor B beyond my control.  It's like reading an Annual Report which always puts a positive spin on everything, the pot of gold is just around the corner.  I've heard more than my share of CEO's in my life and compared to what JP has said is tame in comparison.  I don't pay attention to what they say.  I'm interested in the results.
Mike Green - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 02:47 PM EDT (#153309) #
I actually don't see Hinske as a Pesky Pole (yikes) kind of guy.  Rather, he seems eminently capable of hitting 320 foot doubles off the Monster.  Off Mariano Rivera, rather than B.J. Ryan, of course!

At the start of the season, I felt that the moves that were made would give the Jays (modest) playoff shots in 2006 and 2007.  After that, the picture seemed quite bleak.  I still see it that way. 

Pepper Moffatt - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 02:49 PM EDT (#153311) #
"  I don't pay attention to what they say.  I'm interested in the results."

I'd agree with this as well - people don't want to hear about the labor pains, they just want to see the baby.

Problem with the Jays is that the results have been pretty lousy.  I've enjoyed watching the team, but the on-the-field performance has been below average.

Plus the difference here is that JP isn't just giving excuses for why things are bad now; he's implying that things will continue to be bad in the future.  He's not even suggesting there's a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.  It's a bizarre sort of anti-marketing.  Like the guy who goes to the bar and uses a story about how his dog just died as his pick-up line in order to play on her sense of pity.
Pepper Moffatt - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 03:10 PM EDT (#153318) #
I'm not sure why you didn't expect much the first few years - I certainly did.

The 5 years before JP got here, the Jays were 411-399, for a .507 winning percentage.  They had a bunch of good young talent in the minors.  On the downside, ownership decided that payroll had to go way down, so obviously some sacrifices had to be made on the major league level.

Again, if the Jays go 86-76 this year, they'll have played .490 ball over the last 5 years.  It's not even the first couple years that are dragging the Jays down - JP did a great job of slashing payroll while keeping the on-the-field performance about the same.

Year 3 obviously dragged this team down a great deal, but it's hard to pin that on the previous regime.  The only real legacy from the Ash era on the team was Delgado.  While Delgado had an enormous contract, he is also a borderline future Hall-of-Famer.

Pepper Moffatt - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 04:46 PM EDT (#153332) #
Every team has injuries.  Delgado still managed to hit 32 homeruns and get over 450 at-bats.  Wells didn't miss too much time due to injury (20 games?)  Greg Myers was a 38 year old catcher making $800,000, and the guy who replaced him (Zaun) did an excellent job.

Halladay was a pretty big loss, though.  He only missed about 1/3rd of his starts, but he wasn't exactly himself in the other 2/3rds.

Plus it's not as if the Jays set the world on fire in Year 4, either.

Jordan - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 05:04 PM EDT (#153335) #
Three general thoughts. First, clearing most of Hinske's contract off the books is a good move. He had a nice start to the season in a part-time role, then reverted back to form -- there was never a better time to rectify the error of his contract than right now. He's a bench player, nothing more, and there are only two teams in baseball that can afford $5M bench players. His "great" attitude interests me not at all -- give me a great player with a mediocre attitude rather than vice versa any time. I won't particularly miss Eric Hinske, and I seriously doubt he'll suddenly become a good ballplayer in a Red Sox uniform -- the hand-wringing over his departure from fans who spent years ripping him is pretty funny.

Second, this is no white flag -- the Jays are not a contender and they are long since out of contention. The season ended when they went 2-8 on a do-or-die road trip through the west coast and the Bronx. Actually, no, the season ended when Gus Chacin's elbow broke down and he became the third starter to implode. Find me a team that can survive the loss of 3/5 of its rotation in a tough division. If the Jays can get value for any other FAs or bad contracts between now and season's end, all the better -- lingering disappointment over this year's team is no excuse to put off burial of the corpse. And make no mistake, this is a very disappointing team.

Third, I think concerns about JP's ability to produce a winning ballclub are legitimate. Hinske's trade has nothing to do with it -- JP's comments after the trade are what have me upset. I don't ever want to hear the words "payroll limitations" coming out of his mouth again. That's an excuse, and excuses are for losers -- I thought we were past that. If I genuinely believed the Jays could never overcome the Boston and NY payrolls, I'd give up on the team completely. I don't believe it. What I do believe is that an exceptional front office in Toronto can overcome the payroll disparity. For the first time since Ricciardi arrived, I no longer really believe this is that exceptional front office.

The Jays' recipe for success in 2007 isn't hard to figure out. Full and productive seasons from Burnett and Chacin. Excellent bullpen performances from relative newcomers Accardo and League. A very good defensive shortstop (any offence would be a plus). A full-time starting catcher with solid defence and pitcher-handling abilities (Mike Barrett would look nice, Brian Schneider nicer but even less likely). Consistently good strategic decisions by the manager. And a run of good luck, which every winning team possesses in abundance. That's not an impossible list to fill -- but it's not easy, either, since I do think the payroll will remain relatively stable. It's what faces JP Ricciardi starting right now.

Injuries and underperformance on the pitching staff killed the Jays' 2006 season -- that's bad luck, plain and simple. But the underwhelming performance of the prospects called up to help out the big club, as well as the fiscal-restrictions crap coming out of the GM, make me as pessimistic about the club's future as I've been since the day JP Ricciardi took over. I sincerely hope this is as bad as it gets.
Dave Till - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 05:18 PM EDT (#153336) #
I didn't hear the J.P. interview in which he talked about payroll restrictions. I agree that it's a bad sign, but I don't put too much stock in what J.P. says on the air. He tends to shoot from the hip in interviews (which is what makes him fun to listen to).

I think J.P. was using Billy Beane logic when he dumped Schoeneweis and Hinske. He looked in the minors, saw that he had two guys just as good who were cheaper, and made the moves. You can't really fault the logic.

For the most part, I think J.P. has done a good job managing the major-league roster; he just hasn't been very lucky. But there isn't much on the farm: virtually none of the plethora of pitching prospects (say that ten times fast!) have developed, and Lind is the first real live hitting prospect to come out of the J.P. era. Pretty much all of the Jays' minor league teams have losing records, and I seem to recall that the SkyChiefs aren't happy with what the Jays have been giving them. Scouting and development was supposed to have been J.P.'s strong point.

The Ash-era Jays did a much better job drafting than J.P. has.

Craig B - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 09:29 PM EDT (#153364) #

RHP Kyle Jackson

Control issues are new... Jackson had better control earlier in his career at lower levels.  Sox may think that he'll have trouble moving up, and minor league relievers aren't that big a deal, but Jackson has decent tools to work with and had success at the lower levels. ranked him #17 in the Sox system; Sickels didn't have him ranked in the Sox top 20 before the season, likely because of his struggles at reaching AA this year.

Craig B - Thursday, August 17 2006 @ 09:32 PM EDT (#153366) #

That should say "last year".  And Jackson wasn't all that in the Sally League anyway.

Those are great K numbers, though, 97 in 73.2 innings.  11.8 K/9 is impressive!

greenfrog - Friday, August 18 2006 @ 12:15 AM EDT (#153384) #
Three general thoughts. First, clearing most of Hinske's contract off the books is a good move....I seriously doubt he'll suddenly become a good ballplayer in a Red Sox uniform -- the hand-wringing over his departure from fans who spent years ripping him is pretty funny.

- Hinske's contract isn't off the books. The Jays are paying half his 2007 salary. The Red Sox arguably have a useful, versatile bench player, with very good numbers against RHP, at a reasonable cost this year and next.

- Eric has shown a lot of character this year (in addition to performing well). He has value to the team--as a bench player or backup 3B/1B/RF. Or as a part-time DH. I think it's fair that fans feel some pain over losing him--especially since the return is likely to be negligible, and we're paying almost half of the money still due to him.

Second, this is no white flag -- the Jays are not a contender and they are long since out of contention. The season ended when they went 2-8 on a do-or-die road trip through the west coast and the Bronx. Actually, no, the season ended when Gus Chacin's elbow broke down and he became the third starter to implode. Find me a team that can survive the loss of 3/5 of its rotation in a tough division.

- Are you absolutely sure the Jays are out of contention? Positive? As out of it as, say, the Dodgers were on July 27 (47-55, 7 GB, when 12 teams had better records in the NL)? Just asking.

What I do believe is that an exceptional front office in Toronto can overcome the payroll disparity. For the first time since Ricciardi arrived, I no longer really believe this is that exceptional front office.

- The level of payroll needed to compete in the AL is debatable. Can an exceptional front office win in the AL East on a payroll lower than that of the Yankees and Red Sox? I think so. But $75M seems low to me. We had to make an expensive splash to make the acquisitions we did in the off-season. The Jays can win, but now isn't the time to get conservative. Rogers doesn't have to spend like crazy either. I think $85-95M puts the team in a much better position to win. At $75M, we're top-heavy with a handful of contracts, and precious little left over to sign Wells and a few other good players.

- I don't think this front office has ever been exceptional. Average, I'd say. There seem to be these alternating cycles of adulation and excoriation of JP & co. Why not recognize management's performance for what it's been--some good, some bad: in other words, in the middle of the pack.

The Jays' recipe for success in 2007 isn't hard to figure out. Full and productive seasons from Burnett and Chacin. Excellent bullpen performances from relative newcomers Accardo and League. A very good defensive shortstop (any offence would be a plus). A full-time starting catcher with solid defence and pitcher-handling abilities (Mike Barrett would look nice, Brian Schneider nicer but even less likely). Consistently good strategic decisions by the manager. And a run of good luck, which every winning team possesses in abundance.

- The problem with this recipe is that it's a long shot. Burnett has an injury history. Chacin's missed two months, and hasn't really proved himself to be a #3 starter; his peripherals just aren't that great. Accardo is unproven (and as good as League's looked, this is his first run of consistency). The torrid offence of 2006 is going to cool down in '07. We're likely to lose several good players to free agency. And the rest of the rotation is a serious question mark.

- Good teams produce their own luck. That's why you play 162 games. The luck tends to even out. Imperfectly, but it evens out. And if anything, the Jays have been lucky this year--check out their record in one-run and extra inning games.

Jordan - Friday, August 18 2006 @ 08:44 AM EDT (#153395) #
He has value to the team--as a bench player or backup 3B/1B/RF. Or as a part-time DH.

Sure he has value, if he constitutes 2% of a powerful team's $120M payroll, which is what the Red Sox will be paying him next year. At more than 8% of a mediocre team's $75M payroll, which is what the Jays would have had to pay him in '07, he's a misallocation of funds. Not that I have great confidence that the money saved by his trade will be spent wisely this winter.

Are you absolutely sure the Jays are out of contention? Positive?


Let's say that, against all odds, the four best teams in the AL -- Detroit, Chicago, New York and Boston -- all play .500 ball from now till season's end. To win even the wild card, the Jays would need to finish better than the White Sox, who are currently playing .600 ball (72-48). To finish with a .601 winning percentage, the Jays need to have a final record of 98-64. Since they currently stand at 65-56, they need to go 33-8 over their remaining 41 games.

As out of it as, say, the Dodgers were on July 27 (47-55, 7 GB, when 12 teams had better records in the NL)?

If Toronto were in the NL West (where they'd be in first place), NL Central or AL West, they'd be contending. But they're not. The Blue Jays simply don't have the talent to overtake two or more of New York, Boston, Detroit and Chicago, which are the conditions for contention right now.
Mike D - Friday, August 18 2006 @ 09:06 AM EDT (#153396) #

Not to quibble with your very valid point, Jordan, but if the White Sox played .500 ball the rest of the way, they'd go 21-21 for a record of 93-69.  For the Jays to force a one-game playoff (assuming other competitors fall by the wayside), they'd need to go 28-13 over their remaining 41 games.

Realistic?  No way.  But do I want the team to play hard this weekend just in case?  Absolutely.

Mike Green - Friday, August 18 2006 @ 10:39 AM EDT (#153402) #
One does not need to run down Dave Bush to praise Lyle Overbay or run down Orlando Hudson to praise Troy Glaus.  Bush's line over his career is as follows:
389.3 innings, 4.30 ERA, 4.38 FIP, 4.48xFIP, 6.1 K/9, 2.0 W/9, 1.2 HR/9

He's pitched in a tough park in a tough league with a good defence, and in a tough park in a weak league with a poor defence.  Bearing in mind his innings in Syracuse in 2004 and 2005, it's pretty clear that he can be counted on for 180-200 innings a season. His performance over the last 3 years has been a little better than Ted Lilly's. 

CaramonLS - Friday, August 18 2006 @ 10:51 AM EDT (#153404) #
Brewers Park factors

Calling it a tough park is a stretch, considering it has over its 5 year lifespan, Miller Park, actually averaged being a pitcher's park.

Mike Green - Friday, August 18 2006 @ 11:00 AM EDT (#153405) #
I got my park factors here. Milwaukee was apparently 1.02 for runs during 2003-05, and 1.08 for homers, which as you can see is a particular weakness of Bush's. 
Mick Doherty - Friday, August 18 2006 @ 12:22 PM EDT (#153415) #

In other "former Jays IF joins division rival" news ... The New York Yankees have signed Frank Menechino to a minor league contract.


Mike Green - Friday, August 18 2006 @ 02:45 PM EDT (#153427) #
I've created a new "This Day in Baseball" thread.  Please place your comments there, as this thread has outgrown its space.:)
Mick Doherty - Friday, August 18 2006 @ 02:47 PM EDT (#153428) #

I wonder how many frachises have an 11 season streak of 86 wins or more.

Don't know, but the Yankees are working on their third such streak right now with 10 in a row coming into 2006 and likely to make it to 86 wins again for the 11th straight time this season. They also won at least 86 games 13 straight years from 1946-58 and no less than 18 straight years from 1926-43.

It's worth noting that those first two streaks were in 154-game seasons. Even more notably, they were 10 and 12 games over .500 in 1944 and 1945 (which is what 86 wins is now, 86-76), meaning they were at least +10 for 33 straight seasons, 1926-1958. That's pretty good.


Hinske Traded To Red Sox | 210 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.