It feels like forever since our last move.. but aside from that, I think this is a worthwhile shot at the proverbial dartboard.
It is good to have other options as I don't know if can allow myself to believe that Towers can be relied upon again. The first time was hard enough, even though there was always a voice telling me not to.
Thomson's career (National League) stats: 4.69 ERA, 1.10 HR9, 2.61 B9, 5.69 K9 and 1.39 WHIP. I imagine his ERA will be over 5.00 in the AL East, especially pitching at Roger's Center with his relatively high HR9 rate. I'm not expecting him to perform any better than Chacin, Marcum or Janssen, but for $500,000 I guess there's nothing to lose and it's nice to have insurance. If there really aren't any other starters coming, I'm going to keep my fingers crossed and hope that McGowan turns a corner, gets called up early and pitches like the #2 starter he's capable of becoming. I just don't like the Jays' odds of going to the playoffs with Halladay, Burnett and three guys with ERA's around 5.00.
Thomson's career ERA+ is 103. His ERA+ in his only relatively full MLB seasons (2002-2004) were 98, 102, 116.
Pitching with pain (blisters, shoulder problems) often leads to balls being left up in the zone, which would explain his HR rate. If he can pitch pain free, I think he can be effective. This would allow Janssen and McGowan to focus on AAA, if they don't win the fifth spot outright in ST.
Thomson's career (National League) stats: 4.69 ERA, 1.10 HR9, 2.61 B9, 5.69 K9 and 1.39 WHIP. I imagine his ERA will be over 5.00 in the AL East
Keep in mind that most of that was in Colorado, an incredible hitters' park. In one year in a great hitters' park in the AL (Texas), his ERA was 4.85, and as recently as 2004, he had an ERA of 3.72 in a full season in Atlanta. I think if he's healthy he's an upgrade (and a cheap one) over what they currently have, and also gives more depth to the rotation. For $500,000, an excellent pickup.
Trying to plug one of Thomson, Chacin or Towers in the 3rd spot still makes our rotation very, very weak.
I disagree. Having a below average #3 starter, in a rotation with a well above average #1 and average-to-above-average #2,4,5 starters, makes our rotation anything but a "very, very weak" one.
but if he can give 200 league average innings
Considering that he has given 200 league average innings just once in his career, and that was before his recent spate of injuries, I'd say that the likelihood of this is fairly remote. Would a $10M performance out of a $500K pitcher be great? Obviously. But we shouldn't delude ourselves.
I know there's an age and talent gap, but if Jason Marquis can command 3/21 to pitch at Wrigley, then I'll gladly take a one-year deal with John Thomson for minimal money. I'd like to see the Jays take on one more low-risk starting pitcher to enhance the competition for the two undetermined spots in the rotation.
If the rumours are true and the Jays have been shopping Rios to no avail...then the trade market for good starting pitching has truly gone berzerk.
Dead on accurate Jonny. I like the Thomson signing but he is a more injury prone, older, but cheaper, Josh Towers.
On the periphrials, and on the likelyhood of success, there's very little difference between them - unless there are some higher order stats I'm unfamiliar with which make a distinction.
Three things I love about this signing:
1. JP has now twice snatched a servicable to good veteran near the end of FA for a bargain price. This takes foresight, guts, and persuasiveness.
2. For the back end of a rotation, having a lot of options is always good. I'd be on board with giving a slightly more expensive flier type contract to Armas, too. At the least, the team wouldn't get caught having to rely on options that aren't working or that should really be in AA.
3. In this market, in this year, that total $ commitment is stellar. Nothing less than.
" I'm bemused that so many seem to be high on this move but at the same time still completely down on Towers. Towers is 3 years younger, had a better year than Thomson has ever had just 2 years ago, and unlike Thomson was not injured in either of the last two seasons."
People are higher on Thomson because Thomson was a pretty good pitcher for four or five years (He's had an ERA+ of 98 or higher 7/9 years) . Towers strikes me (and others) as someone with poor stuff who had one flukey year. Thomson is not a saviour by any means, but he is more likely to be a decent pitcher than Towers is. (And towers was not just a little bad last year, he was horrific.)
This signing is an appalling reflection of the state of pitching in MLB these days. If Marcum and Janssen lose out to Towers and Thomson 07 will be a long disappointing season. I would rather lose in 07 and let Marcum, Janssen and McGowan grow in the Bigs than lose with Towers and Thomson. At least then there would be hope for 08.
Remember Bonderman took his lumps before he reached the next level. I can live with the young guys failing...I couldn't bear to see them in AAA growing slowly while stiffs get stuffed in TO. IF the two T's play, we BETTER win with them...or...or...sigh...
That's Thompson with a 'P', as in 'psychology'.
Marcum and Janssen lose out to Towers and Thomson 07 will be a long disappointing season.
Neither Marcum or Janssen have a ceiling anything like Bonderman and the best case scenario from them is minimal development that would be in line with their major league-level potential. Unless someone like McGowan is ready to pitch, I would rather have league averague warm bodies like Thompson pitching.
Chacin's got 304 MLB innings worth of being an above-average pitcher. Even last year, he was a shade under average (ERA+ of 93); he got smacked around by the Yankees, but pitched very well in 4 starts against the Red Sox. Thomson, too, has been an average pitcher throughout his career (ERA+ of 103).
They're perfectly good pitchers if they're healthy. I don't know how healthy they'll be, but when they make it to the mound, they'll keep the Jays in the game.
Why are people trying to compare Marcum and Janssen to Bonderman. Bonderman is the Tiger's ace - he should be compared to Halladay/Burnett.
Frankly, we are above average at the front of our rotation. We are hoping for one of Towers/Chacin/Thomson to pitch near their ceiling. If one of them does it, we'll have an average #3 starter. We're asking two of Janssen/Marcum/Rosario/McGowan/and the two who don't settle into #3 to be our #s 4&5. If two of those six step up at all, we'll be just fine at the back end. The probablilites of our 3-4-5 holes falling into place isn't as bad as people are making out.
We should expect an average starting staff (if Doc and AJ can start 55 games). Coupled with a top three offense, we have a chance to improve on last season. Don't we, doom merchants?
Lg #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 MLB 3.60 4.14 4.58 5.10 6.24 AL 3.70 4.24 4.58 5.09 6.22 NL 3.51 4.04 4.57 5.11 6.26
Hardball Times gave us these numbers a couple of weeks ago.
They are the averages for starters at each rotation spot, as I'm sure many of you will recall.
Does anyone have the time and technology to convert these averages to ERA+?
#1 slot: 118, 123, 118, 128
#2 slot: 103, 107, 104, 108
#3 slot: 98, 96, 97, 101
#4 slot: 89, 86, 90, 88
#5 slot: 79, 77, 78, 80
Boston could be better, but there's no guarantee. Matsuzaka will be good, if not great, but Schilling is getting old. Beckett was beaten senseless by the AL. Papelbon missed the last month with an arm injury and hasn't started a game for almost two years. Wakefield is a reliable average pitcher, but he's going to be 40 and he spent a couple months on the DL in 2006.
If everything goes right, the Red Sox could have a great rotation. But if everything goes right, the Jays might, too - Halladay & Burnett are top-notch, and three average, healthy pitchers could rack up a lot of wins with this offence. Odds on everything going right for either team?
Thank you, danjulien.
So, average AL rotation (1-5, ERA+):
118 / 103 / 98 / 89 / 79
Blue Jays 2007 rotation, 2006 stats (Doc/AJ/Chacin/Marcum/Janssen)
147 / 118 / 93 / 93 / 93
The front end numbers would come down a bit if Doc and AJ miss games. But projecting 93 ERA+ out of Chacin/Marcum/Janssen and whomever else wants to join in (Thomson, Towers, Rosario, McGowan) is pretty reasonable, in my opinion. So we'd be well above average in the one-hole, above average at #2 and #5, and average on aggregate at #3 and #4.
I'm happy so far. I'd like better pitching, but it's up to our youngsters to provide it. We have a farm system rich in pitching prospects (quantity above quality) and poor in position players. We should not be trading hitters for pitchers at this point in time.
The Star has a short interview with Thomson. It's the usual sort of "I'm healthy and ready to win games" thing, but I liked this part:
He also received a contract offer from the New York Mets, but liked what he saw behind the plate in Toronto better.
"I like (Jays catcher Gregg) Zaun. He wants to win and he's not going to let anything get in his way," Thomson said. The 6-foot-3 right hander also mentioned his faith in the gold glove of another recent re-signer, centre fielder Vernon Wells.
But projecting 93 ERA+ out of Chacin/Marcum/Janssen and whomever else wants to join in (Thomson, Towers, Rosario, McGowan) is pretty reasonable, in my opinion.
It's only reasonable if Gibbons and co. can figure out who the right guys are to post that 93 or better ERA+ from the get go
"We should expect an average starting staff (if Doc and AJ can start 55 games). Coupled with a top three offense, we have a chance to improve on last season. Don't we, doom merchants?"
I think an average pitching staff is probably about right, but a top-3 offense seems like a massive stretch. Everyone would have to stay healthy and be near or at their career bests to have that happen both of which are very unlikely.
118 / 103 / 98 / 89 / 79
Blue Jays 2007 rotation, 2006 stats (Doc/AJ/Chacin/Marcum/Janssen)
147 / 118 / 93 / 93 / 93"
Averages are INCREDIBLY misleading in cases like this because the AL average includes every single pitcher that started (including say Josh Towers and his 56 ERA+ and the entire K.C. rotation. Also, who the number 3 guy and who the number 4 guy is often doesn't matter at all after the first start and is impossible to tell. The five guys who are likely to be the 3-5s had ERAs of 4.82, 5.05, 5.06, 5.07, and 8.42 last year none of whom even made it to 100 IP last year. That's simply bad especially considering that this is not a group like Minnesota where the starters (Garza, Bonser) have a lot of upside. A much better way to look at it is to look at other contending teams and how their pitching matches up. The Jays match up well at 1-2 with anyone in the league and poorly 3-5 with everyone else. And I mean virtually everyone else. If the Jays want to contend, they are going to have to get someone who can be a solid number three starter (or given Burnett's injury history a nunber 2).
I think people should not rule out Scott Downs. I know JP and the boys were not eager to let him start because they are just way too comfortable with him in the pen. I like him alot because he filled in marvelously in 2005 with an 11K start and he kept us in the game in a whole lot of his starts.
Alot of people are going to refer to his awful starts last year but people should bear in mind that most were spot starts. I personally enjoyed his scoreless 5 inning outing against Minnesota where he gave up 4 hits and had a walk and a K. I believe he was held to a pitch count since it was a spot start. As Billy Beane was quoted in Moneyball, you can't judge a pitcher based on his last 30 innings(or was it his last 3 outings).
He's not your prototypical LOOGY and I think having him as a long guy is just a waste of a guy who can start and do it well. He just needs an extended shot! Here are his stats as a starter:
Averages are INCREDIBLY misleading in cases like this because the AL average includes every single pitcher that started
That isn't misleading. That is the very definition of average. It also includes all the incredibly good pitchers like Santana and Halladay and the short season samples like Liriano.
My only point was that the rotation isn't "very, very weak" with a below average third starter, as was stated earlier. I think we'll find that with the continued development of MacGowan, Marcum, Janssen, and Rosario, the possible rebound of Towers, the addition of Thomson and the possible improved health of Burnett that the Jays staff is no worse off this year than last year. We won't miss Lilly's 5, 100-pitch innings every week as much as many would have us believe.
"The notion that the Jays are giving up their season without a "solid" #3 is unfounded."
Not in the least. In order to make the playoffs, the Jays would have to finish ahead of one of Boston or New York and also ahead of teams like Anaheim, Detroit, and Chicago all of whom have deeper rotations than the Jays. (Who the Cardinals or Mets had as their #3 is irrelevent). Maybe the Jays wouldn't need a #3 if their offense was dominant or their 4 and 5 starters were very solid, The Jays don't have either. They have, as of right now a rotation that is simply not good enough to compete. (If the Jays somehow upgraded their offense from Clayton and Johnson to Tejada and Manny then maybe they wouldn't need a #3, but the Jays roster just isn't one that is going to make the playoffs at this point.) Also, if you want to look at the ERA+ of the rotations of playoff teams last year
Yankees-125, 121, 91, 88, 85 (Mussina, Wang, Wright, Johnson, Lidle)
Twins-207, 161, 106, 103, 75 (Liriano, Santana, Bonser, Radke, Silva)
Tigers-125, 118, 118, 111, 93 (Verlander, Robertson, Rogers, Bonderman, Miner)
A's-116, 108, 104, 92, 91 (Zito, Haren, Harden,Blanten Loaiza)
Yankees-125, 121, 91, 88, 85 (Mussina, Wang, Wright, Johnson, Lidle)
Twins-207, 161, 106, 103, 75 (Liriano, Santana, Bonser, Radke, Silva)
Tigers-125, 118, 118, 111, 93 (Verlander, Robertson, Rogers, Bonderman, Miner)
A's-116, 108, 104, 92, 91 (Zito, Haren, Harden,Blanten Loaiza)"
how many of those players will repeat those numbers? How many will be healthy all season? and of course we know that not all of those players will or are still with said team. Pitching is a crapshoot, you can never have enough pitching and surprises do happen, both positive and negative. At this point in time I wouldn't be losing too much sleep over the Jays rotation. Like a few posters have mentioned, JP probably isn't finished and also there certainly is some upside in Marcum, Janssen, McGowan and some of the other young pitchers. Anybody remember Jimmy Key or Dave Stieb's rookie numbers? .... or most rookie pitchers who went on to really nice careers? :)
I think the recent articles that have come out in the past couple weeks that show the average ERA+ for each rotation spot have been very useful at this sort of thing.
When we talk about a position player being above or below average, it's usually pretty easy to get everyone on the same page as to what is actually being said.
But this whole, strong-average-weak starting rotation stuff. It never seems to have a frame of reference. Or if it does it's done by taking the 2 or 3 best starting staffs in the league and showing how the Jays don't measure up, which hardly seems useful.
I'm with ayjackson. Why don't we try to establish some sort of objective standard for what an average starting rotation looks like before we start calling the Jays weak.
Jordan and Ron, between them got it right.
Roy, AJ and Rios. These three guys perform as we REALISTICALLY hope they perform AND we've got a fighting chance. All other roads lead to hell.
"Blue Jays right-hander John Thomson is not alone in his criticism of Mets catcher Paul LoDuca. Many rival players believe LoDuca is overrated defensively, and some Mets officials are still miffed that LoDuca allowed right-hander Guillermo Mota to abandon his changeup in a pivotal at-bat against the Cardinals' Scott Spiezio in Game 2 of the National League Championship Series. Mota got ahead 0-2 on changeups, but Spiezio hit a two-out, two-run double off a fastball to tie the score. ..."
"We had our [staff] look at it, and what we found is that No. 5 starters have an ERA of about 6.25, and No. 4 starters are at about 4.60," said Ricciardi. "We just need guys who can hold the fort down."
"I was telling [the front-office staff], 'You're going to think I'm nuts, but there will be a day soon when a 5 ERA is considered to be average in the big leagues, considering how lineups are being built these days."
There's no one player who's completely key to the team's playoff hopes. Obviously you'd rather have Chacin get injured than Halladay, but most teams need to have generally good luck and very little bad luck if they want to contend. Where would the A's have been last year if Zito or Haren got injured on opening day? Or the Tigers had one or two of their young starters struggle? What would the Twins' season look like if they hadn't lost Liriano?
Unless you're the Yankees and have the bucks to bring in Bobby Abreu mid-season, most teams would be crushed by a major injury or off-year to a key player. Similarly, most teams rely on at least a couple players busting out and having career years. You need a good team, but you also need some good luck.
Roy, AJ and Rios. These three guys perform as we REALISTICALLY hope they perform AND we've got a fighting chance. All other roads lead to hell.
That's not what I mean. With Halladay, you can feel pretty confident you know what you're getting; aside from some nagging forearm worries and a magnetism for batted balls, Halladay is one of the league's five best pitchers. He's not going to be mediocre, and you can count on that. Royce Clayton is a journeyman shortstop near the end of his career who will provide little offence and less defence than advertised. He's not going to be good, and you can count on that. Most of the Jays' players have these kinds of established levels of performance, relatively small ranges of potential results with which you can forecast the club's chances.
Rios and Burnett, to me, are the only real wild cards on the roster. It's reasonably possible that Rios could break out with a .350/.380/.600 line in 2007 -- in just his first 183 AB last year, Rios had 10 HRs and 30 extra-base hits. it's also reasonably possible that he could regress to the .262/.302/.397 line he put up over a full season in 2005. Either of these Rioses could show up next year, or one of many potential Rioses in between; that range of potential performances is much broader and provides much more uncertainty. Same with Burnett, who could post a full season of 200 IP, 200 H, 64 BB, 168 K, and a .257 Opp BA, a very solid season; or he could feel more real or imagined pains in his arm and spend most of the year rehabbing in Dunedin.
Worst- and best-case scenarios for Rios and Burnett aren't hard to imagine, and wouldn't surpirse anyone if they did. A healthy Halladay going 10-16 with a 4.97 ERA or Royce Clayton posting a .290/.340/.460 line are beyond the pale. That's what I mean when I say Rios and Burnett are the only players whose full-season performances realistically can lift this team into the playoffs or dash its hopes altogether.
Scott Downs would fill that role very nicely
Yes, one more for the Scott Downs bandwagon! Downs really has proven that he can pitch in the majors and he could post a 4.25 ERA over 180 innings with a WHIP of 1.25, that's better than league average! Perhaps even better than what Chacin can offer.
Can anyone think of effective closer to starter shifts outside of John Smoltz?
The first guy that came to my mind was Ted Power, but his mid-'80s shift from 27-save guy to 34-start guy in Cincinnati didn't really go all that well. And he moved back to the bullpen into the next season and for the rest of his career, though he never really closed again.
Good question!
Pistol, all I'm saying is that there was a time(2005 to be exact) when this guys got a chance to start 13 games and this is what he delivered:
I'd be very, very curious to see what this guy could do over 30 starts while having an offensive lineup to boost those 4 wins in 13 starts! I believe in this guy because most of his outings last year were 2 or 3 innings where he posted incredibly good numbers, and his 11 K start, 8K start(in only 5 innings) in '05 were electrifying. If he's this good, we may well have two above average number 3 and 4 guys with him and Chacin. We might be sitting on a gold mine here!
I don't know why my cells didn't translate well. But here's what Downs stats were as a starter in '05
Season ERA W L SV SVO G GS CG IP H R ER HR BB SO AVG
2005 4.30 4 3 0 0 13 13 0 69 71 37 33 7 25 60 .259
How about Derek Lowe? Tim Wakefield was experimented as a closer for about half a season.
You can put Danny Graves as a failure as a starter.
one thing is clear, there will be a lot of second guessing unless things go very well.
Having seen, read, and heard enough baseball fans over the years, I'm fairly confident that there will be a lot of second guessing unless the Jays manage to win 162 straight perfect games and score about 1,500 runs.
Probably even then. ("I know BJ Ryan has struck out every single batter he's faced this year, but why the heck would you take Halladay out when he's riding a streak of 10 straight complete games, and is leading by 10 runs, and is due to face three left-hande batters in the ninth? Stupid Gibbons!")
