Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
Jays edge Indians

Gibby likes to say that he hates using Bo Jr for more than one Innings at a time, that doesn't of course stop him from actually, you know, doing it.

He was at it again last night noting, "'re trying to win games and you've got that special guy down at the end (of the bullpen) who makes his living down there. ... I try not to, but it's tough not to use him.", after he had called Ryan as another disaster needed to be averted in the eighth.   Ryan got the job done last night. He came in with no-one out, and after some fun and games during which Cleveland loaded the bases, induced Marte to pop-out and K'ed Grady Sizemore. Normal Ryan service was, thankfully, resumed later with a 1-2-3 ninth. Not a bad time to go to the big guy for a long outing last night, he hadn't pitched in four days and was probably chomping at the bit, and with Speier on the shelf, League already used, and Accardo having worked the day before there was no obvious candidate to come in once Downs had given up a homer to open the eighth.

It was nip and tuck for the Jays to get into a situation where they needed Ryan, but a solid five Innings from Marcum and some timely hitting against the opposition's ace was just enough to scratch a lead going into the final Innings.

Player of the Game:
Another excellent Vernon effort, two for four with a couple of RBi and a home-run.

Unsung hero:
Marcum had his third good start in a row, he went five innings, striking out six and walking just one.


Elsewhere in the East: The Yankees were having a tough time against the Royals until the eighth, when they went through most of the Kansas City bullpen en route to a 10 run Inning. In Baltimore Rodrigo Lopez had a stellar start, but the O's offense could do nothing to help him and the game was lost 1-0. Not to blame the O's offense too much, they had to face Weaver, Shields and KRod - it doesn't really get much better than that. Boston kept their lead over the Jays to two, winning a close one with the White Sox behind a strong Tavarez start. The Red Sox got Varitek, Nixon and Ramirez back from injuries and expect Oritz to return today. The Devil Rays also dropped a close one, losing 2-1 to the Twins despite another decent Tim Corcoran outing, he's having a nice little run lately.

Halladay against Sowers, 7:07 at the RC
TDIB: Jays 4 - Indians 3 | 67 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Paul D - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 09:58 AM EDT (#154631) #
Marcum's looked a lot better his last 3 starts.  Has he changed anything, or has he just run into poor offensive teams?

Also, did anyone think he was pulled a little early yesterday?

Mike Green - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 10:18 AM EDT (#154632) #
The Indians, even without Hafner, are not a poor offensive club.  Marcum had thrown 100 pitches in 5 innings, so it is not really a surprise that he was removed.  He's really had only 1 bad outing since being giving a chance at the rotation.  He was left in a long time to help the bullpen on that occasion and absorbed 9 earned runs. 

Chris Costancio of projects Adam Lind in a THT article yesterday. Costancio feels that Lind really is not ready to contribute in 2007 taking into account both offence and defence, but that his bat will eventually be excellent.

Paul D - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 10:35 AM EDT (#154633) #
The Indians, even without Hafner, are not a poor offensive club.

Yeah, I should have phrased that differently.  Was Marcum just lucky in that he ran into days on which they didn't play very well?

Mike Green - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 10:46 AM EDT (#154634) #
Sure.  Or it could be that Marcum is going to be a very good pitcher once he learns the ropes a bit.  His stuff and command are good enough.  He helps himself by fielding his position well.  I am very optimistic about his future, but the more dispassionate people at have him as an average major league pitcher over the next 3 years. 
Magpie - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 10:55 AM EDT (#154635) #
did anyone think he was pulled a little early yesterday?

I didn't think he was going to make it through five, to be honest. From the third inning on, he seemed to be going to a full count on almost every hitter (I stopped counting after five of seven). He was walking on a wire most of the afternoon.
Marc Hulet - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 10:57 AM EDT (#154636) #
I still believe we have yet to see the real Shaun Marcum, although he's getting there. Marcum had plus command in the minors and he is still battling the strike zone to some degree. I was really impressed how he used his change and curve to throw the batters off, after having established his fastball and slider.
MondesiRules - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 11:08 AM EDT (#154637) #
Major announcement on 2:30 E on the Fan this afternoon regarding the merging of MLSE and Rogers.  Hmm, bigger payroll perhaps?
js_magloire - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 11:25 AM EDT (#154640) #
I am also excited for Marcum. I think he's beeng getting a little bit of the Bush/Taubenhim treatment, where a pitchers ERA and record as an ERA make people think they're bad. I heard one person say he's like Josh Towers, which I didn't like because there are many control pitchers, doesn't mean their all going to collapse and become like him. Anyway, in all of Marcums starts, this is how he's fared, in order, and the opposition has been not easy:

5 IP, 0 ER (TEX)
5 IP, 3 ER (NYY)
4.2, 2 ER (OAK - another instance of Gibbons pulling pitchers too early before they have a change to work through things)
2.2 IP, 3 ER (NYY)
6.2, 2 ER (BAL - loss thank you Scott Schoeneweis)
5.0 IP, 4 ER (MIN)
6.0, 1 ER (KAN)
6.1, 1 ER (CLE)
5.0, 2 ER (CLE)

That's fantastic IMO for a rotation next year that only has 2 locks. Make that 3 now. League average pitching, or even guys a little better, are underrated and if we have 3 of them, we could do damage next year.

Named For Hank - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 11:30 AM EDT (#154641) #
What's the pre-announcement scuttlebutt?  Is this a genuine "merger" of the two where MLSE gets involved in telephones and internet and cable?  Or is Rogers buying MLSE or part of MLSE?

Sportsnet ended up with very little Raptors content for the upcoming season, with the majority of games being on TSN and Raptors TV; they haven't had a ton of Leafs broadcasts, either, in recent years.  If Rogers had the money and the current owners of MLSE were willing to sell, buying MLSE would make a lot of sense for them.

But I really can't imagine MLSE buying into Rogers -- they're too different.  I suppose we'll see in three hours.
Ryan Day - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 11:40 AM EDT (#154642) #
  It's probably a bit desperately optimistic to read much into a few good starts, but Marcum and Chacin are giving me hope for next year. If they can be about league-average, the Jays' rotation should be in pretty decent shape. And I do like Chacin quite a bit if he's healthy - I know the numbers may bode ill, but there's just something about his style and demeanour that makes me a believer..
Craig B - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 11:47 AM EDT (#154643) #
Why no?  Wouldn't this be better, money wise?   It would mean that the Jays would not only be a distant second thought in the market as a whole, but within their own corporate group.  A bad outcome, I think.
Anders - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 12:08 PM EDT (#154645) #
The Ontario Teachers Pension Plan has something like a 60% stake in MLSE, and lets put it this way - theyre arent the kind of owner that would want  to spend the extra money to bring home a championship, or even spring for an extra couple bucks to bring in an important player. So if theyre going to have a controlling interest, then, uh, not so good.

There is a reason why the Leafs and Raptors never spend a ton of money.

Mike Green - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 12:13 PM EDT (#154646) #
I know very little of competition law, but wouldn't the regulator be interested if one corporation owned all three major sports franchises in Canada's largest city?  Perhaps not.

I will be very interested in Pepper's take on this after the announcement.

VBF - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 12:18 PM EDT (#154648) #

The FAN 590 morning show was discussing this announcement to be made at 2:30, but to be no more than Rogers and MLSE partnering up for a marketing endeavour. Rogers is larger and more powerful than MLSE, so my educated guess is that it's Rogers diving into MLSE more than MLSE getting involved with Rogers and the Jays.

Why wouldn't we want MLSE to get involved with us?

MLSE like Rogers, is in there for the profits, but in their situation, their priority to maximize pofits is much more emphasized as a result of the fact that the ACC will always be sold out for Leaf games. Rogers had realized that the only way to increase profits was to commit to payroll, to better the team. For MLSE, this motivation doesn't exist.

There's also been alot of stories about the MLSE Board of Directors basically running a crazy regime where everything they say goes, and anybody who stands in their way gets the axe.

The bottom line is that MLSE's best interests are to maximize profits as much as possible while putting the worst team you can get away with on the field. Essentially, they're the anti-Steinbrenner (Defn of Steinbrenner: accepts financial loss to ensure he has the best players on the field).

Blame the teachers union! :)

VBF - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 12:31 PM EDT (#154649) #

I know very little of competition law, but wouldn't the regulator be interested if one corporation owned all three major sports franchises in Canada's largest city?  Perhaps not.

On  a smaller scale, if Eugene Melnyk can buy a second OHL team, own their facilities and basically destroy them, all while following laws and having board after board pass such a deal (which is what he did to the IceDogs), then I'd have to think this would be a cakewalk for Rogers.


Mudie - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 12:52 PM EDT (#154651) #

There is a reason why the Leafs and Raptors never spend a ton of money.

Anders...? wow, um you mean to say that the 2003-04 combined teams payrolls of 140 million or so is not "a ton of money"?

MatO - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 12:56 PM EDT (#154652) #

The notion that MLSE is not willing to spend money is getting really tiresome.  Before the salary cap era the Leafs were in the top 5 in payroll in the NHL and were regularly going after high-priced FA's.  Now with a hard cap the Leafs spend the max that they can.  The only way for them to make more money is to go deep in to the playoffs where they can gross an extra $2M+ a night, thus they have a real motivation to ice a good team.  As for the Raptors they were 20th in payroll last year ahead of the Spurs and the Suns and 700K behind the Pistons.  There were a lot of empty seats last year for the Raptors that need to be filled and they spent the money necessary to bring Colangelo in.  Hell, they paid Lenny Wilkins $4M a year.

Any merger between the Jays and MLSE would be difficult considering that I believe Bell owns a piece of the Leafs.

ayjackson - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 01:00 PM EDT (#154653) #

There is a reason why the Leafs and Raptors never spend a ton of money.'s called a salary cap.

If there were to be a merger, it would be the Teachers relinquising control.  They'd probably end up with shares in Rogers, which wouldn't amount to a significant interest.

R Billie - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 01:38 PM EDT (#154659) #
What I heard is that it's a business partnership.  Probably crossmarketing, maybe involving some of Rogers' media resources as an incentive for MLSE to help promote the Jays.
CaramonLS - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 04:37 PM EDT (#154675) #

TSN Story - Ownership is giving JP some more coin to work with.  No word on amounts.

Mike D - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 04:40 PM EDT (#154676) #
Caramon beat me to the punch on that article.  It's short on details, long on self-aggrandizement from Ted Rogers...but can't possibly be bad news.  I would love another off-season with moves motivated by short- and long-term baseball needs rather than salary dumping and bargain shopping.
Mike D - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 04:53 PM EDT (#154678) #
I should take back my "self-aggrandizement" point.  The CP story says "Rogers says the team is lucky to have him," but the "him" in this case appears to be Ricciardi.  My bad, Ted.
Ron - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 06:03 PM EDT (#154682) #
I mentioned in another thread I hope that Jays don't bump up their payroll, and now it looks like it will happen. I stand by my comments. I'm giving this news the thumbs down. I like the payroll increase, I just don't like who's in charge of spending the money.

Where are all the people that complained about payrolls getting out of hand when the Jays were around the 50 million mark? Those people were sure quiet when the Jays went on a spending spree last off-season, and I'm sure they will be nowhere to be found today or tommorow.

It's always interesting when the shoe is on the other foot..........

Rickster - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 06:19 PM EDT (#154686) #
Ron, I think JP has been successful in spending money and unsuccessful in building a solid farm system. I'd much rather have him spend than save. He's not going anywhere, largely because his employers seem to be thrilled with the job he is doing, so I'd rather he keeps doind what he does best.
Ron - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 06:56 PM EDT (#154692) #
JP has stressed signability is a major factor in who the Jays draft.

I'll give you an example of the Jays passing on what I percieve as a more talented player because of bonus demands.
On a WWJP last year, JP mentioned the Jays did look at C____ M_____ and liked the player but they were hearing his bonus demand was pretty high.
The Jays drafted Ricky Romero with the 6th pick and the bonus was 2.4 million. The Tigers selected C___ M____ with the 10th pick and the bonus was 2.65 million.

Players like Stephen Drew and Mike Pelfrey were passed over by teams in their draft because of bonus demands. Eventually the D-Backs and Mets were willing to pay above slot to get these players in their organization.

Dez - Tuesday, September 05 2006 @ 07:01 PM EDT (#154693) #
Well these 'budget picks' were all done before the increased payroll was announced, so I don't understand your dismay at the increased payroll.
TDIB: Jays 4 - Indians 3 | 67 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.