The regular season is about to start and Sportsnet still hasn't released their schedule for the whole season and the commericials are built around  ............ Buck Martinez. Despite the fact the Jays are probably going to lose around 95 games, I'm still looking forward to the season.

If you're going to mention the bad outings by Marcum, Tallet and Rzep, why not mention the excellent outing by Brett Cecil yesterday against a Red Sox lineup that included most of their regulars?  It was arguably the best single performance by a Jays pitcher this spring.  Five shutout innings, only two hits allowed (both singles), four strikeouts, only one walk.   Cecil has been looking good lately, trimming his spring ERA to a tidy 3.68.    He probably deserves consideration for a slot in the rotation if Morrow isn't ready -- or maybe even if Morrow is ready.

Due to the fact the Jays are probably going to lose around 95 games, I'm looking forward to the season.

fixed

Would Cito even have been at the Cecil game? Cito goes with what he knows.

In other news, Mike McCoy is apparently the favorite to win the final bench spot on the roster (Bastian says).  Which raises the question: why do the Jays need John McDonald on the team?  McCoy has played 304 games at shortstop in the minors, and he played at SS again today in the game against Pittsburg.  If he can play an adequate SS, he could be the backup behind Gonzalez, creating a spot on the roster for Jeremy Reed or someone useful like him.  Reed is batting .420 this spring but probably won't make the team if McCoy is chosen.  It would be good to have McCoy AND Reed on the team, not just one of them.  I was originally quite tolerant of the latest contract for McDonald, figuring that the team needed a defensive SS backup to help the young pitchers.  But McCoy is a far more useful player than McDonald -- he can play infield and outfield and can actually bat.  No need to have three shortstops on the team, but that seems to be exactly what the Jays are heading towards.

I thought that Cito has his mind made up about Zep but from reading Bastian's blog today it appears that there is a three way competition for the last starters spot.  Zep has struggled a little and Cito comments on that.  AA drove down to Fort Myers yesterday to watch Cecil and Dana Eveland is out of options so it is not inconceivable that Cecil and Zep both end up in AAA.  Cito's quote:

"Spring Training is so funny," Gaston said. "Zep has had a tough first few innings. Cecil's had two good turns out his last two times out. Automatic, he's going to move to the top. He's going to move to the top of the list, but it's still not over. We go back and forth all the time on that. One guy one day and another guy the next day. Both of them still have a chance. We'll sit down with Alex and [assistant GM Tony Lacava] and work it out.

"It could change in a week still. If guys don't make the team and they go down to [Triple-A] Vegas, who knows what mappen happen a week from now? We do have those guys down there and if somebody gets off to a bad start and we feel like we need to make a swtich, we're fortunate to have the guys to make that switch."

Tallet had been struggling too but the best cure for a struggling pitcher is to face the Pirates.

who knows what mappen happen a week from now?

Couldn't have said it better myself.

To China fan:

Good question. In reality, the Jays don't have a fixture at the shortstop position even if Gonzalez is the de facto player. It is actually a good problem to have 3 shortstops. There are solutions to having both Reed and McCoy on the team:

1) carrying 12 pitchers and 13 batters
2) let Encarnacion on 15-day DL if he cannot be ready for opening day.
3) assign another player to Vegas. For example, assign John McDonald to Vegas. Given the offensive outburst at PCL, McDonald's defensive prowess may actually help both the 51s and keeping him in form. But this transaction will defeat the purpose of having him to help out the youngsters of the pitching staff. Also, McDonald could be claimed by other team when going through waivers. Or Sinder to Vegas if Cito decides not to put him in the starting lineup regularly. Recalling the experience of Lind and Purcey for numerous trips between Vegas and Toronto, both players splits time between the two places to improve themselves. They both progressed. Lind is an all-star and a cornerstone of franchise and Purcey is supposed to be in the Jays' bullpen given his showing in AAA and all-star appearance in 2008. I think Snider can be given a similar treatment if he is on a management plan to be improved. Once the path for Snider is decided, both McCoy and Reed can take advantage of Snider's staying in Vegas. I believe either one of Gonzalez or McDonald is not with the Jays or a spot in 25-men roster will be available when Snider is up with the Jays for good.

Anyhow, as Gaston said of choosing Reed and/or McCoy, "it is a tough one."

It is actually a good problem to have 3 shortstops.

It is a good problem to have 3 shortstops other teams want. But I doubt that's the case. I can't say with certainty that if McCoy, McDonald, or Gonzalez we're put on waivers anyone would claim them.

I would guess most of us love the idea of McCoy getting a shot at shortstop, as he would be a cheap shortstop option that could be pretty productive for the next few years. That being said, I highly doubt AA is going to want to eat a contract he signed months earlier. I have been assuming it's going to be a season of "Why isn't McCoy the everyday shortstop?" all season long, as we watch AGonz/JMac, struggle at the plate.

Beeston chatting here.

Did I read that right that he was thing 25-30 years before a new stadium? I guess Rogers is going to try and get every penny they can out of Jays' fans.

The Jays have released Joey Gathright.  It was obvious that Gattright was not going to make the opening day roster but he was willing to go to AAA.  AA is quoted as saying that Gathright would not have played much in Vegas.  The candidates in Vegas for the outfield are Chris Aguila, Chris Lubanski, Jorge Padilla, Aaron Mathews and possibly Jeremy Reed if Mike McCoy makes the team.

He also wrote, "A new stadium is not going to change the climate in Toronto."

Do remember attending a game at the Ex in April? On those RF baseline benches. Dave Steib might have been pitching, sure... but it was not nearly as pleasant as watching Clemens pitch in April in 1998.

The key thing is not how much money Rogers receives at the gate from Jays fans, but how much of that money is put back into the team (100% hopefully) and how much more they are willing to add because the Jays are a decent content provider for the rest of the network.

I truly hope the SkyDome lasts at least 40 years. Perfect location, best retractable roof.

I do not like the possibility of having 2 outfielders and a bunch of utility players.
I also hate 12 man pitching staffs.

For those few misguided souls still hoping to see Joey Gathright make the opening day roster I have some bad news.

Cybercavaliar, what's the deal with demoting a vet on a guaranteed contract like McDonald?  He just has to clear waivers, or does he have the right to refuse the demotion? 

Not that I see that happening in a million years but I am curious. 

The article on Gatright quotes AA as saying "We sit here and we try to figure out a team for April 4 and, really, it's the best team over six months. We know it could change so quickly. Guys don't perform, guys have options, guys get run through the waiver wire -- it could change so quickly".

To me, that sounds like options and waivers are going to play a big role in who goes north with the big club.  I love the emphasis on maximizing resources, however small, and this makes me think Eveland is likely to make the team.  Could also spell trouble for Accardo. 

The question of John McDonald making the team has everything to do with public relations and nothing to do with common baseball sense. This is a team that has lost face with most of its fan base and must do everything possible to start to get it back. Keeping an extremely popular player around on payroll is one small way to do this, IMO.

John McDonald is popular with the fans? Really? I thought he was just popular with the pitchers because he keeps their ERA down.

Defensive replacements are fine, especially if you have platoon hitters that can pitch hit before you slide them in, but they are just luggage when you have a manager that doesn't use his bench.

The bullpen will be thin as it is with 13 men. Can Johnny Mac throw a strike?

I obviously meant to write pinch hit.

The question of John McDonald making the team has everything to do with public relations and nothing to do with common baseball sense. This is a team that has lost face with most of its fan base and must do everything possible to start to get it back. Keeping an extremely popular player around on payroll is one small way to do this, IMO.

That's one of the strangest comments I have ever read on this site.  Keeping McDonald for... PR reasons?

CaramonLS: If my comment about PR is so strange, then I would be interested in knowing what your rationale is for the Jays giving John McDonald another two year contract.

jerjapan, call me not telling the truth if you will. BUT please look at the history and reasoning of AA resigning JohnnyMac to a major league contract, which doesn't carry enough common baseball sense.

Based on common baseball sense, Johnny McDonald is :
1) 35/36 years OLD, so his bat most likely not improve from his already weak hitting.
2) good for defense and playing the infield. Cito gave me chances to play in left field last season to increase McDonald's bargain.
3) such a veteran going through waiver is not likely to be claimed so he can be sent down to Vegas without much troubles.

BUT AA still signed JohnnyMac to a major league contract. So there must be some reasons non-baseball wise. The reason presented to the public is his ability to help the youngsters of pitching. Later on, AA sign Alex Gonzalez from Boston. Compared this scenario to releasing Raul Chavez and resigning him to a minor league contract and acquiring of Jose Molina. The reasoning behind having 2 catchers are still helping the pitching. So at the first place, why can't AA sign JohnnyMac to a minor league contract with an invitation to spring training, just like Chavez?

Remember guys, this is a public forum. Even AA could be reading our comments.

typo: Cito gave him chances to play in left field. Sorry

The only way I can make sense of the MacDonald contract is that he is a very solid citizen in the clubhouse. 

Also, if you can play a decent shortstop, you will have a major league job for as long as you care to make a million bucks a year.  Look at Omar "relic" Vizquel, still cashing the cheques.

The 2 years, however, is in my estimation, completely inexplicable.  Oh well, good on Johnny Mac.

Both McCoy and Reed have had very good springs.  I would prefer if both were on the club, but it looks like it will be one or the other.

I prefer McCoy, at least he's unproven. Reed has shown no real ability to hit at a major league level. Though he was once a high draft pick, so it'd be good to gamble on him nonetheless

I meant to get to this when Magpie posted on the hitters... but...here's something.

Just decided to play with a toy model (google "markovball sokol") and used the BIS solutions estimates for HR, 3B, 2B, RBI, SINGLES and OUTS. The point was to compare two batting orders and get a rough estimate of the number of runs the the Jays will score this year.

The first: Bautista, Hill, Lind, Wells, Overbay, Snider, Ruiz, Gonzalez and BuckMolina.

The second: Overbay, Hill, Lind, Wells, Snider, Ruiz, Bautista, Gonzalez and BuckMolina.

The first line up scores 741 runs. The second 771 runs. The model, as put together, will be conservative, but the projections I used are known to be optimistic. So you can subjectively scale the absolute number of runs to your level of optimism/pessimism.

How about converting him to a pitcher? But he seems not to have a strong arm as in Loewen, Ben Davis or Sergio Santos.

I meant Gathright. For Reed, I think he is like Jerry Owens, good enough for AAA but never get together his batting performance. Personally, I like McCoy if I have to choose (it is a very tough decision, both in managerial sense and being a nice player manager like Cito). He brings speed, basestealing, versatility, hitting for average, on-base ability all in one body, whereas Gathright and Redd have some qualities of McCoy's. As for McCoy himself, his skill sets match perfectly with Jays' need and he is 29. This season is critical in both professional careers of all three players.

If it's worth anything (and I'm slowly coming to the realization that's it not..), from attending the last 2 home openers, John McDonald received louder ovations than anyone besides Roy Halladay.

It's no secret that fans like underskilled white players who more resemble the average Joe in body type than the modern athlete and play their little hearts out. David Eckstein was a massive fan favorite in St. Louis, a cornerstone of their team. You also earn extra bonus points if you pull your socks up; fans in Toronto cried when Reed Johnson was released for Shannon Stewart, and far too many loved Joe Inglett enough to make Aaron Hill move over to SS. A solid majority of Ontario probably thinks Reed Johnson is a better baseball player than Alex Rios.

Just my 2 cents worth. Johnny Mac is a sinkhole where ever he hits. It's like a pitcher hitiing. He will get a few hits here and there because the opposing pitcher relaxes a bit knowing that he is soft at the plate. Popular or not, if McCoy is better all round, then one of the two is redundant.

fans in Toronto cried when Reed Johnson was released for Shannon Stewart

Well, that was just a poor management decision.

When are we going to get any info on the rosters of the minor league teams. I'm very interested to see how the new regime slots all the various prospects into the different affiliates/

If John McDonald got a longer ovation on 2009 opening day than Aaron Hill, that would be a testament to the ignorance of fans rather than prejudice.

Many hold the view that Ricciardi was fond of McDonald because of the similarity of their skill sets as a player.  It is a little harder to explain AA's affection for him, particularly in hindsight after Gonzalez was signed. Anyways, none of this is of any great significance in the long run, provided AA learns from the mistake.

The minor league season doesn't start until the middle of next week.  Rosters are usually announced this coming Sunday or Monday and the teams head out to the site of their first game on Tuesday or Wednesday next week.

Roster decisions have to cascade down so the big league Jays need to decide who they are taking to then allow Las Vegas to decide and so on.

This season is critical in both professional careers of all three players.

Lemme see, now.  That makes six careers, is it?  Or two?  Or three?  One and a half?  Helluva site.

A solid majority of Ontario probably thinks Reed Johnson is a better baseball player than Alex Rios.

I don't think they're that wrong. I mean, sure, Rios is a more talented ballplayer. But his career OPS+ of 102 isn't hugely better than Johnson's 95. (Granted, Johnson's numbers get some benefit from being platooned.) And Rios' talent and athleticism aren't all that impressive at those times when he looks like he barely even knows which end of the bat to hold, let alone which base to throw to or how many outs there are.

Blair has word on Hechevarria,saying "he could be in minor league camp as early as Friday once his visa's finalized."

Brandon Morrow pitched in a minor league game today and it went well.  He thinks he is on track for starting game 2 in texas.

They can't cut Dana Eveland now. 5 innings of shutout ball and 7 K's to this point in today's game vs the Tigers.

Make that 6 shutout innings.  Rzepczynski has had a few rough starts, if he struggles tomorrow I think we might see him in AAA to start the season.

Hats off to John McDonald for getting things started with a single in the sixth to break up Rick Porcello's no hitter, followed by JoBau's double, then  Hilly cashed them in.  Eveland = awesome, Carlson...not so much.

Go Dana Eveland!  I think Tallet's done a remarkable job for us over the past few years but I would be MUCH more comfortable starting the season with Eveland in the rotation and Tallet in the bullpen.

Of course my opinion of him is skewed by the memories of him having his way with the Jays while with Oakland...

Valdez had a clean inning with two k's today as well, I could see Accardo going down as he has an option, which could be interesting.

Also read on ESPN insider Rumors that the Jays are willing to deal Frasor for "if they can get at least one top prospect in return along with at least a second-tier prospect to aid in their rebuilding".  Same article says they would trade Gregg with his permission and Gregg would be willing to go to contender if he was the closer, also states the Jays want the same for Downs as they do Frasor. 

I say find 3 suckers...er...partners to trade with and get those 3-6 prospects. I'll endure a Jays team without a closer if it gets a handful of prospects.

Wouldn't it be funny if Accardo is set to go down but just before the paperwork happens Downs & Frasor & Gregg are traded then the Jays go 'oops' and make Accardo the closer again? I could see him getting 30+ saves given a shot again which would suddenly make him trade bait come mid-summer. Clear out those 4 and we'd still have tons of candidates.

hmm... who does need a closer?

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/370330-fantasy-baseball-is-the-closer-situation-in-2010-worse-than-2009 suggests that the AL Central is the open audition for closer area. The Twins & White Sox the most in flux but the Tigers & Cleveland are potentially in flux with only KC set (go figure).

Seattle is listed as in danger of a change, Philly/Florida/Washington are listed as potential changes in closer situation. Other spots have flux but appear to have backup plans thus won't do anything for awhile.

Should be interesting to see. Relievers are a risky bunch and teams always seem to be short a couple. Lets hope someone takes the bait and gives up some value (Twins most likely).

If I could get a top prospect for any of those guys I'm not sure I'd be holding out for a second tier one to be added.

It's probably just posturing. I hope they trade Gregg, I never really liked that signing anyways. I hope Downs stays, I like him, a former Expo too.

John, really, you'd like to trade FOUR of the top relievers on the team?   Let's not get carried away here.  It might make sense to trade one of them, but four is a bit much.  There's really no guarantee that the upcoming young relievers will be adequate to replace them.  Bullpen aces are an important part of a winning team -- they're not just interchangeable parts that you pick up on the scrap heap for free.  The young bullpen prospects -- Stewart, Farquhar, Collins or whomever -- are certainly not guaranteed to be as good as we're hoping.   Look how the perceived depth in the starting rotation has swiftly vanished this spring.  (Suddenly we're grateful that AA made the effort to acquire Eveland in the off-season, at a time when everyone was touting the starter depth that the Jays already had.)   If we trade away 3 or 4 relievers, we could be left with big holes in the bullpen for years to come.  Even in a rebuilding season like 2010, the Jays could demoralize the team unnecessarily if the bullpen is crippled by the trading of Frasor, Downs, Gregg etc.   Sure, trade one of them, but not three or four of them.

Even in a rebuilding season like 2010, the Jays could demoralize the team unnecessarily if the bullpen is crippled by the trading of Frasor, Downs, Gregg etc.   Sure, trade one of them, but not three or four of them.

I guess it really comes down to how long the rebuild is going to be. If the team isn't planning on making a real push for 3 seasons, and you can get solid prospects for the relievers, then you have to do it. If you don't care about winning, then why have a great bullpen? That being said, it still comes down to getting a better offer than the EXPECTED picks received for Downs, Frasor and Gregg; which any trading partner should understand when making the deal...

This team has so much pitching coming through the system, that they always can converting starters to relievers...

Ultimately, Frasor and Downs are both premier relievers, and they have more value to a contending team than the Jays, I would argue if they aren't traded, it's because AA is asking for too much or other GM's simply won't pony up what they should.... And I would guess the asking price would be two solid prospects...

This is pretty speculative, but compensation for a potential Type A like Frasor could be even more valuable than usual next off-season, if reports about the strength of the 2011 draft class are to be believed. So demanding a lot for him might not be that out of line.

Is it just me, or do others think Bautista might have an offensive turnaround a la Scutaro in the leadoff spot. He's put together one major spring. While there's oooing and ahhing about Mike McCoy and Randy Ruiz, Bautista has been simply mashing.

Detroit is not in flux at all.  Jose Valverde will close for them.  Washington is a potential change, but if they don't like whatever warm body is closing for them now, they'll call up Drew Storen from the minors.  They won't be trading anything for any Jays relievers.

Apparently Dana Evelands Mom reads mlb.com.

Courtest of the comment section of the latest games recap:

PitchersMom wrote: Knowing Eveland personally, he is extremely happy with the Blue Jays in every aspect. He would LOVE to be a part of the team and would accept any roll. As a starter he likes the structured routine with workouts. He feels the organization respects the players and treats them all very well. The coaches have given Dana an opportunity to pitch his own style, and not try to change what he's comfortable with. His performances are proof that it works. 3/29/2010 4:31:21 PM

PitchersMom wrote: I can say this, Dana learned last year that going to spring training to "work on your stuff" doesn't pay off when you're fighting for a spot. He thought he had a guaranteed spot and was trying to finesse his pitches when he then found out he wasn't a shoe-in. He then switched up to throwing strikes and getting guys out but it was half way thru the season. I can also say that he has what it takes to go the distance. In years' past he finished up regular season then went to Mexico to pitch even more, and was very successful. He's not your stereo-typical "pitcher" body type. He's big boned and thick. As long as he keeps up with his workouts and running he'll endure. 3/29/2010 6:54:24 PM

Is it just me, or do others think Bautista might have an offensive turnaround a la Scutaro in the leadoff spot. He's put together one major spring. While there's oooing and ahhing about Mike McCoy and Randy Ruiz, Bautista has been simply mashing.

I am normally fairly skeptical of a hot spring training and am in this case, as well. However, one point in Bautista's favour is that he reportedly tinkered with his batting stance in late August/early September after speaking with Cito and Tenace and went to hit 10 of his 13 home runs in September and put up a .944 OPS over the month.

Also, I suspect Eveland all but made the club today. If the Jays do not bring Accardo north, I do not see him taking it very well based on last year and his reluctance to return to begin with.

I am normally fairly skeptical of a hot spring training and am in this case, as well. However, one point in Bautista's favour is that he reportedly tinkered with his batting stance in late August/early September after speaking with Cito and Tenace and went to hit 10 of his 13 home runs in September and put up a .944 OPS over the month.

Same thoughts all around. Though I also put little weight on spring stats, I too read about the Cito/Tenace adjustments. If they can get a turnaround there, it's a remarkable group of guys whose offensive production considerably improved in a short time - Scutaro, Hill, Lind etc.

Also, I suspect Eveland all but made the club today. If the Jays do not bring Accardo north, I do not see him taking it very well based on last year and his reluctance to return to begin with.

He'll certainly have no one to blame but himself. Today's outing blew the lead, and again righties whacked him. His OPS vs. righties was pretty horrific last year if I recall. Often guys with themselves to blame deal with it through anger. Hope you're right on Eveland. My own view is he should be starting instead of Morrow who should be in NH learning control.

According to an article in the Star today, Cito acknowledges Eveland has made the team, although he may start or relieve.  I'd bet he's a starter. 

I find it interesting how many people are advocating trading our relievers for a top prospect + 1 .. people who annually advocate non-tendering several relievers to save a few million dollars or so.  For years I've been suggesting we trade our top relievers only to hear repeatedly that most relievers are interchangeable and that we'd get nothing in return.  A few rumours circulate online for a couple of weeks and presto - the Box is convinced our relievers have value. 

 

No one that I can recall suggested non-tendering Frasor, and Downs was (and is) under contract. 

Believe it or not, it is a typo. Thanks for pick it out. But this time I stick to my interpretation of AA signing of JohnnyMac because I don't want to speculate whatever reason AA may have.
Anyway, back to discussing the Jays, congratulations to Eveland. IMO, I prefer him than Tallet because he is younger and Tallet has a history of unspectacular starting pitching performance.

Congrats to 30 yr old former bluejays minor league veteran Erik Kratz as it looks like he has earned his first big league gig backing up Doumit in Pittsburgh

My bet on the pen is, at most, one guy being traded by mid-April with another one by July 31st. I'd love it if other teams went nuts for Jay relievers and overpaid but odds are strongly against it (anyone have a young Jeff Bagwell for a reliever?).

My idea of sending out all 4 would be if we got a top flight prospect back in all 4 cases. The pen could be a mess as it would end up as Accardo, Carlson, Camp, Janssen, Valdez, Roenicke, and maybe Purcey. It wouldn't be a disaster but it could be 1983/1984 ugly (talent there but unable to find a true closer until Henke in '85).

John, the bullpen without those 4 would be even worse than you think, because Accardo was one of the 4 that you wanted to trade!  So he wouldn't available to anchor the surviving group of relievers.  Basically you'd be left with Carlson, Camp, Janssen and a bunch of unproven pitchers who could implode.  It would indeed be a disaster.

But what I find particularly puzzling is the notion that Kevin Gregg could be traded for a "top-flight" prospect.  A couple months ago, anyone in the majors could have signed Gregg for $2-million.  Having not bothered to bid for him in the off-season, why would any team suddenly offer a top prospect for him?  Doesn't make sense.  (Although I see that Jeff Blair is making the same argument today about Gregg's value -- so maybe there is some desperate team with an unexpected hole in its bullpen which could suddenly overpay for him.  Would be nice.)

Jeff Blair does make some excellent points about the reasons why the Jays shouldn't trade away half their bullpen, and why the Jays need a strong bullpen this year, even in a rebuilding year:

"Nothing is worse for a young starter’s psyche than a hard-fought lead turned to mush because of uncertain relief. And when a team that isn’t very good has to run out four or five relievers to get the last three outs, that has implications for the next day’s starter. When there’s no time-clock in a game, emphasizing development over outcome can sometimes be a bitch."

No one that I can recall suggested non-tendering Frasor, and Downs was (and is) under contract.

I agree, but people were suggesting non-tendering Camp and Tallet, at least. I thought that was a mistake, mainly for the reasons that ChinaFan spoke about, in that we'd need a strong bullpen to bolster the confidence of the young starters and we'd also need long men in the pen capable of doing 2-3 innings a couple of times a week without problem. The team is going to have stretches this year where guys are knocked out of the game before the end of the fourth three times in five days or something.

The second issue is that if the team had non-tendered Camp and Tallet and others, the bullpen would be quite thin. Even with the emergence of Eveland and Purcey this spring, imagine that the team had let those two go and then deals Frasor this spring. Let's push Eveland into Tallet's spot in the rotation, but then the bullpen suddenly shapes up something like: Gregg, Downs, Carlson, Valdez, Accardo, Purcey and Janssen with our depth coming in the form of Roenicke and then guys like Steven Register and Lance Broadway (assuming that any help from pitchers such as Collins and Farquhar is at least four months to a year away). That wouldn't be the end of the world, but that bullpen combined with our young rotation would have had some very rough stretches, IMO. Also, many of us who advocated keeping Camp and Tallet also didn't anticipate the team signing Kevin Gregg.

The suggestion that Tallet and Camp ought to have been non-tendered was based (I think) on a presumption that similar performance could be obtained from other relievers for less than a million.  You can certainly argue that on either side of the proposition. 

Blair's argument for "relief support" being necessary to bolster the confidence of young starters unfortunately has some merit.  The problem is the persistence of the notion that starting pitchers "win" or "lose" games.  It's tough enough for pitchers to feel responsible for runs scored "on them", but winning and losing is another story.  If one was to apportion credit/blame for a win or loss in a game to the starter, on average, it would be probably about 25% (roughly 2/3 of 37.5%).  The myth continues, nonetheless.   

But it's not merely a perception problem, and not merely a question of myth. A weak bullpen would force the young starters to pitch deeper into games than they should.  If several relievers are burned out after a 4-inning start by a young pitcher, and if this happens a couple times in a week, a young Morrow or Cecil or Romero could be under pressure to pitch 7 innings the next day, even if he's not ready for it. 

In my view, it is completely a perception problem (at least in regards to the Jays of 2010).  If a manager feels that he has to keep Zep, say, in the game when he's struggling and has thrown 80 pitches because his bullpen isn't great, the manager needs to be replaced.  An adaptation has to be made to reduce end of game platoon matching, and allowing longer stints from the bullpen to make up for the inability to consistently get 6 innings from the starting staff.

It may be argued that for a contending team, there is a slight marginal benefit to the current relief usage, but that is of little importance to the Jays of 2010.  I incidentally do not agree with the general proposition either. 

Of course, if we traded away 1/2 the pen (I forgot which 4 I listed earlier to be honest) then in addition to the guys given a shot would be the possibility of rotating in kids or going to a planned reliever situation much like in the spring.

Thus rather than burning through 4 relievers in a game you'd be using 1 or 2. Fewer wins (unable to do proper match ups) would be possible but if it kept the arms healthy it would be worth it.

In truth, with a 7 man pen there is no need to be pushing starters anyways. If you have a killer stretch where the pen gets exhausted you can always send someone down and call up someone else (or two or whatever) in order to keep things rolling thus making it more like an 8 or 9 man pen. Other relievers will be released by others who aren't as good but could eat innings (ala Tallet in the rotation).

IMO AA should, if he finds partners, trade any current Jays reliever for a top prospect (or two) in a second [by top prospect I mean first round draft quality]. No way he finds partners for 4 guys, but if he did I suspect he'd find a way to cobble together a pen that would be endurable for 2010.

Frequent trips to and from Vegas are indeed the secret to not overworking the pen - I always felt JP didn't do enough of this, it will be interesting to see AA's approach here.

I was able to attend Damien Cox's interview with Beeston at the Toronto Reference Library last night.  Beeston's a smooth talker and quite the politician, so nothing too controversial came out but some interesting nuggets nonetheless:

• Beeston claimed responsibility for not signing Paxton, saying if he'd done a couple of things differently, we could of got him.  Eliopoulos was apparently asking for too much money
• he vigorously defended Cito as an 'asset to the organization' for this year and beyond, said his managerial style is unlikely to change, but repeatedly stressed that his mandate was 'to develop the young players'.  Given that Cito is a part of our plan for next year, it seems unlikely he'll get replaced mid-season, but it did sound like he might have had some direction from the front office regarding young / controllable talent (a phrase that came up frequently) 
  
• Beeston is really high on AA, several times comparing him to Gillick.  very little was said of JP other than 'we were going in another direction'
• he claimed to oppose realignment, suggesting that playing the Sox / Yanks brings out the best in our team, and that we are building for the World Series anyway, so we have to beat the top teams
  
• He claimed that if we hit 3.5 million fans at the Dome, we could be a top five team in baseball revenue-wise.  3 million puts us in the top ten.
• He mentioned Stewart in the list of our top young starters with no mention of relieving, and mentioned Henderson Alvarez (or Alvarez Henderson, as he called him first) as our best unheralded starting prospect 
  

" people who annually advocate non-tendering several relievers to save a few million dollars or so."

I don't recall anybody really making that argument this year, and here's why (assuming the people who complained like me the year before think the same way) - Halladay's 6m, the Jays interest in Chapman, the "signing" of Hechevarria, and the huge draft budget we keep hearing about. Under JP there was a reason to hope that by saving a few million letting Tallet & Frasor go, PERHAPS the team would pump that money back into the development instead (this broke out many discussions about whether the development budget is an entirely separate entity from the payroll budget) and more efficiently spend those dollars. Now, under AA, fans actually have a reason to believe that the team is willing to go overslot and do some international shopping, and they are in on every player if they decide his value matches his asking price. In this scenario, there's zero harm in the team retaining guys like Frasor, Tallet, and Camp, or signing a Kevin Gregg; if they provide value excellent, if not Rogers wasted some $ that they would have pocketed anyway.

Carlson and Purcey have been optioned to Vegas today, and Jeremy Reed has accepted reassignment to the minor-league camp, so he is presumably going to Vegas as well.  So this means that Mike McCoy has made the team, along with Eveland.  If Tallet gets the 5th spot in the rotation and Morrow gets the 3rd spot, then Eveland will go to the bullpen.   The only remaining question is whether it is Accardo or Valdez who gets the final remaining spot in the bullpen -- probably Valdez since he is out of options.  Accardo is preparing for his next emotional meltdown. 

While I suspect he will, I don't think it's guaranteed Rzepczynski has made the club yet based on a couple of rougher starts recently.

I think we do know that the following pitchers will be going north: Marcum, Romero, Morrow, Tallet, Eveland, Frasor, Downs, Gregg and Camp. That leaves three spots for Rzepczynski, Janssen, Valdez, Accardo and Cecil. I think I may be forgetting one or two names still in camp.

Janssen is going to be one of the guys in the bullpen, along with Gregg, Frasor, Downs, Camp. 

If Morrow is healthy, then it's among Rzepczynski, Tallet, Cecil and Eveland for the last 2 rotation spots.  I would think that Eveland is a good bet to make it, given his status and his spring performance.  Tallet will be on the team, so either he's the other starter, or he goes to the pen and either Zep or Cecil is the 5th starter.  Given that they sent Carlson down, they probably want another lefty in the pen, so I wouldn't be surprised to see Tallet get that assignment.  That leaves 1 bullpen spot, which presumably would be Valdez, given his status, and the fact that he has outpitched Accardo this spring.  They could also move Eveland to the pen and leave Tallet in the rotation.  My bet at the moment is we see Marcum, Romero, Morrow, Eveland and Rzepczynski (unless Cecil has another really good start this week, and/or Zep has a bad start) in the rotation to start the year and a bullpen of Frasor, Downs, Gregg, Camp, Janssen, Tallet and Valdez.

If Morrow isn't ready to go, then either Tallet moves into the rotation and Accardo makes it, or all 3 of the Cecil, Eveland, Zep trio makes the rotation.  I would think it likely that they would do the former.

I have a feeling we will see a lot of changes in the rotation during the year, with so many pitchers who are either young or coming off injury.  McGowan and later Richmond and Litsch coming back from injury keeps the heat on the existing guys to maintain their spot.  Then you have the guys who will be in the minors like Stewart, Ray, Mills, likely one of Cecil/Zep.  I think we will see a lot of guys start games for the Blue Jays this year.  Anybody hear anything about S. Hill?

Just regarding the hypothetical lack of depth if/as/when...

Let's run down the list:

Frasor
Downs
Gregg
Carlson
Camp
Janssen
Valdez
Accardo
Roenicke
Purcey

And starters who hav experience as effective relievers...

Tallett
Cecil
Stewart
Morrow

And others who could likely pitch in relief easily enough

Eveland
Ray


that's 16 names

If Frasor and Downs were dealt....and Tallet and Camp had been non tendered (before the 2009 season, it's nonsensical to think they would have been after and I don't recall anyone suggesting it) then we'd likely break camp with-

Gregg
Carlson (eventually)
Janssen
Valdez
Accardo
Roenicke
Purcey

....assuming we hadn't added some other cheap signing like Joe Beimel, Brian Shouse, or Chan Ho park (just to name a few) which we surely would have.

The urge to say "I told you so" is getting pretty out of hand when we have to make up theoretically possible situations in which we would have supposedly been right in order to gain the privilege

We have plenty of bullpen options.

(and yes, to be clear, as little as I like Gregg, i'd have been just fine going into the season with that group of relievers because I think Gregg is the least talented guy in the bunch and I think he's basically average)

While I suspect he will, I don't think it's guaranteed Rzepczynski has made the club yet based on a couple of rougher starts recently. I think we do know that the following pitchers will be going north: Marcum, Romero, Morrow, Tallet, Eveland, Frasor, Downs, Gregg and Camp. That leaves three spots for Rzepczynski, Janssen, Valdez, Accardo and Cecil. I think I may be forgetting one or two names still in camp.

Hard to know what to make of tonight's game, which the YES network was kind enough to show. Although it was in Tampa, it was the Yankees that brought a road team, fielding Jeter, Johnson and Rodriguez with the rest non-starters. Nonetheless, the Jays starters looked like they were in the wrong league.

On the positive side, the top of the order each went 1-3, with AHIll hitting a bomb to left, Lind doubling (with none out and being left there), and Bautista singling and stealing second. This offensive outburst netted them two runs, and save for an Overbay single later which contributed to an unearned run after Vernon reached on an error, and Snider hit the ball out of the infield off Marte, the only time of the night he accomplished that.

Some quickly made impressions. We have a major league middle infield defensively. EE made a terrible throw at third, though he also made a nice play. The bad throw cost a run. Snider's defence is not major league ready, and he looked bad at the plate. There's a lot of 'no offence' after the first three batters. Zep was ok the first time through the order, giving up a run, and didn't make it through the third time. He got hit on the hand reaching for a batted ball, but if Nick Johnson hadn't run himself out at second Zep might have gone thru the order without getting anyone out.

The Gonzales signing looks good, not because he can hit at all, but at least he can field a position at the major league level. I suspect they'll be good defensively in the middle infield, first, catcher and right, poor at third and centre, and godhelpus in left. Vernon's efforts exceeded his range tonight. The 'put Snider in right, Lind in left and DH Ruiz' folk (like Mike Wilner) have no idea what that would do to the defence and thus pitching.

I question whether Zep will make the rotation, and whether Morrow should. Once teams like the Yankees, Red Sox and Rays field their big teams, I'm afraid Morrow's walks will skyrocket and I suspect he'd be better served at AA but the organization wants to 'do right' by him.

Oh, and Janssen looked good, albeit vs. minor leaguers at the end. He may be the closer by the end of the year and it may be a good fit outings-wise.

I'm comfortable with 60 wins or so, and if it's a good year development-wise, and not embarrassing on a regular basis in the field, I can live with that.

The game is "pitching" - a 162 game long pitching marathon.

When our BEST pitchers longterm are: Drabek, Jenkins and Alvarez - it looks to be a long season - and possibly a long next season as well.

It'll be interesting to see which 2 of the other 10 or 12 starters rise high enough be real assets when the Big Three arrive.

Anyone else nervous that Kevin Millar has been released and is available ?

Just chiming in here, and I'm sorry to do this because it's unseemly to plug one's own work, but I have a Jays preview coming up at The Hardball Times tomorrow. At least, that is when it is supposed to run. I tried to have fun with things.

Reading this thread has been interesting. I clearly share some concerns with others, and will be trying not to give Rogers any of my money this season. On the other hand, I don't think fans should throw this team overboard. There is something here.

CDC has this team figured out after one ST game.  Amazing.

Hey, I'll take the over on 60 wins too!

Anyone else nervous that Kevin Millar has been released and is available ?

O, the Jays has Ruiz, Dopirak, Wallace and Cooper as first basemen. And congratulations to Erik Kratz. Is there a chance that Kratz will play backup catcher for the Jays next season if he excels in game play this season ? He is younger than Molina and Chavez who will be gone by the end of this season, and I suppose Kratz is known for calling the game while playing for Syracuse in AAA. I don't think he is elected as an AAA all-star due to his bat.

I clearly share some concerns with others, and will be trying not to give Rogers any of my money this season. On the other hand, I don't think fans should throw this team overboard. There is something here.

I agree. A few posters are challenging some contract signings; it is good sign that fans are concerning about the team success.

Thanks for pick it out.

Obviously I meant ``picking``

Check out THT for Craig's article today.  Like Craig, I am a skeptic about Rogers' intentions vis a vis the baseball club.  I will be watching what they do, not what they say.  Nonetheless, they will be getting a little of my money.  I am a baseball addict, and it doesn't seem to matter how impure the product I receive is. 

Ouch, Craig.  You take quite a few shots (in that THT article) at 'the Blue Jay's 'Powers That Be'.  To be honest,  I was left scratching my head at quite a few of your points.

All in all, it was an OK read.  I really don't understand the vitriol of the responses you got.

At worst, it seemed like you were channelling Richard Griffin in a number places....it almost seemed as if you were *personally* offended at some of the actions that the Blue Jay's have taken this past off-season (choice of GM, coaching changes, etc).

All in all, it was an OK read.  I really don't understand the vitriol of the responses you got.

Actually, given the (lack of, IMHO) caliber of the article, I'm surprised he hasn't gotten more. I found myself constantly wondering where he got his ideas from. I'm also trying to figure out if it was his cat or dog that Paul Beeston and AA accidentally ran over (maybe both??), and if Brad Armstrong bailed out the family farm or something..

In all honesty, if the rest of THT is of similar quality, I'm glad I haven't ventured there before, and I won't miss not having time to read more of their articles..

Of course, I meant Brad Arnsberg.. Not sure where Armstrong came from..

Just chiming in here, and I'm sorry to do this because it's unseemly to plug one's own work, but I have a Jays preview coming up at The Hardball Times tomorrow. At least, that is when it is supposed to run. I tried to have fun with things.

Hi Craig. I honestly fail to see where you had "fun" with things. All I see were (IMHO undeserved) insults hurled at PB and AA. Didn't like your article at all.

Easy.  Craig was never a member of the cabal (There is no cabal), and as far as I know, does not have cuttlefish sandwiches for lunch.

In fairness, Craig does make reference to Arnsberg's dark side- the larger than normal injury experience of his charges- as well as his strengths. 

I finally read Craig's piece and I think a good sub-title would be "A pessimists view of the Blue Jays".  Craig story is full of opinions and interpretations that take the worst possible view of Rogers and the front office.  He could be right but if he is the world is a lot darker tha'sn I see it.  I think Craig's love of Roy Halladay comes through loud and clear and what has happened is the Jays have spurned Craig's love by ditching Roy.  The Jays are "the other woman", they have stolen Roy away from Craig hence the bitterness.

Craig if you read this I thought your shot at Bruce Walton was uncalled for.

Roy was ready to go anyway, you could make an argument that the Jays (Rogers) could have bumped up the payroll and in doing so kept Roy in town.  I have trouble arguing that a company, a business, should deliberately run a deficit.  The "if you build it they will come" school is suspect in Toronto.  The fans did not appear when the Jays were in first place last May, I don't know when they will show up.  Maybe decisions made two or three years ago could have put the Jays in a position to keep Roy but I think it would have been very difficult for the Jays to do enough this winter to keep Roy next winter.

Craig's last section on Roy Halladay is excellent, he is one of the finest athlete's ever to have represented Toronto.

Gerry. You know Bruce Walton better than I do. That said, I haven't ever heard anyone outside the Jays organization suggest that he is a major league pitching coach. As in everything they have done recently, the Jays went with the cheap alternative.

I hope people don't read me as pessimistic. I am far more optimistic about the immediate future than many. I'm angry, and engaging in a little heavy-handed mockery. But not pessimistic.

And this: I think Craig's love of Roy Halladay comes through loud and clear and what has happened is the Jays have spurned Craig's love by ditching Roy. The Jays are "the other woman", they have stolen Roy away from Craig hence the bitterness. is ridiculous, I'm sorry. No matter how much of a mancrush on Doc I have, which I do, my anger with the way the team is being run doesn't have anything to do with that in particular. Hell, listening to Doc's wishes in this and doing it right (and getting a good return for him when they did) is the one completely positive thing that has happened since the new gang took over.

Gerry. You know Bruce Walton better than I do. That said, I haven't ever heard anyone outside the Jays organization suggest that he is a major league pitching coach. As in everything they have done recently, the Jays went with the cheap alternative.

I don't even know if it's the cheap alternative. The Jays have made four major personnel decisions recently (president, GM, manager, pitching coach). In each case, they went with someone who was already in the organization (in Beeston's case, he went with someone who was already sitting at the president's desk). They picked the guy who was sitting beside the previous guy. Don't they know that there are other people in the world? Other baseball teams? Or is it that the Blue Jays organization is so obviously superior to all others that it'd be a step down to bring in someone who's had success elsewhere?

Or is it just that anybody who's qualified and capable knows better than to work for the Jays?

I mean, I know that Beeston and Gaston have had success in the past. I don't mind them getting sinecures on this basis. And I'm willing to believe that Anthopoulos and Walton have something on the ball. But they're going to have to prove it. I'm not at all impressed by the process on display here, and I think it's one reason--not the only reason, but one reason--that the Blue Jays are at least decades away from real success.

Perhaps if Craig's article contained more objective analysis and less anger there would have been no need for the "heavy-handed mockery". Craig is certainly entitled to use his forum to share his opinions; insulting Beeston, AA, Walton and every scout hired is just not the way I would have gone about it.

As for the loss of Arnsberg, I am torn. Subjectively, I believe that Arnsberg brought a great deal of pitching knowledge to the organization and he seemed to possess an innate ability to maximize the best qualities of most of his charges. However, whether the anecdotal evidence supports it or not there was a perception that success came at a steep cost that ultimately only Dr. Andrews benefited from. Furthermore, I found it telling that unlike his departure from Florida, at least publicly there was very little out-cry from the pitching staff and despite the afore mentioned success he has now been unceremoniously cast adrift by his last two organizations. Time will tell if Walton was an adroit choice but I do see the logic; he has had the opportunity to learn from Arnsberg and is obviously very familiar with the pitching staff's strengths and weaknesses.