First and foremost, I'd stop playing Edwin Encarnacion unless it's in a platoon at 1B with Overbay. According to the Fielding Bible EE was by far the worst defensive 3B in the game in 2006-2008, and UZR thinks his D is consistently atrocious. If the team decided there's nothing to gain trying Wallace at 3B, I don't understand where the upside with Encarnacion is. Not having to play EE means you can start Bautista at 3B the majority of the time, and the argument that this effects the defense doesn't hold now that the team acquired Lewis - a Lewis/Wells/Snider outfield with Bautista at 3B should produce similar if not better defensive numbers than a Snider/Wells/Bautista with EE at 3B look. Forcing EE into a platoon would also open up the DH spot to Ruiz vs. LHP, which would be a start, and people always say Edwin's problem is primarily his arm which would be less harmful at 1B where picking skills can shine. (Scott Hatteberg, pickin machine!)

You're left with Lewis-Hill-Lind-Wells-Overbay-Bautista-Snider-Buck-Gonzalez vs. RHP, & Bautista-Hill-Lind-Wells-Encarnacion-Ruiz-Snider-Buck-Gonzalez vs. LHP.

I don't think there's any added trade value in having Overbay face LHP, MLB GMs are well aware of what he can and can't do at this point in his career. Encarncaion's value would take a hit because he wouldn't have a shiny HR total to shop around, but it's pretty obvious that the Reds viewed Encarnacion as nothing more than dead weight and forced the Jays to take him back if they wanted Stewart/Roenicke and wanted the Reds to assume Rolen's '10 salary. The only possible contenders that I could see that might consider EE's remaining 1.5m at the trade deadline are the Athletics and Cardinals, and both are unlikely because the A's seem committed to Kouzmanoff as the Cards are to Freese, with Lopez there to help.

I should also point out that I'd prefer Randy Ruiz be given 4-6 weeks of everyday ABs out of the DH spot to see what he can do, and presented the above options assuming there's no chance of that happening because of defensive reasons. I'd really like to rule out the possibility of Ruiz being the full-time DH in 2011 with a Lind/Wells/Snider OF (and not just assume that wouldn't work), and the only way to do that is by trying it out for an extended period in 2010.

For EE, I am thinking about sending him to AAA to let him work on his glove. Las Vegas don't originally have a third baseman until Christian Colonel was signed close to the AAA opening day.  When Hill comes back from DL, EE can be put on DL and have extended check at his hands and defense. Send him down if his defense can be improved through extended practice.
I think he is still young enough to improve, and too young to be given up.

For Ruiz, I agree with 92-93: give Randy extended ABs and see what he can do in a full MLB season. Because he is not young to be in the future plans for the Jays. If his case can be assessed accurately, he could be handled appropiately, say trading him to another team.

For lineups assuming EE landed on DL after Hill is back,

versus LHP: Gonzalez (SS), Hill (2B), Lind (LF), Wells (CF), Bautista (3B), Ruiz (DH), Snider (RF), Buck (C), McCoy (1B)
versus RHP: Lewis (LF), Hill (2B), Lind (DH), Wells (CF), Overbay (1B), Bautista (3B), Snider (RF), Buck (C), Gonzalez (SS)

Wilner is smoking something funny. Bautista isn't the future? Agreed. But McCoy and Lewis are the same age as Bautista (both within three months, to be precise) and Ruiz is a couple of years older. Those guys are nobody's future either - they're more marginal journeymen who have passed their prime. They're placeholders as well. Just because they haven't been here and are comparatively unfamiliar doesn't make them new and exciting...

I'm with Magpie. If anything, the Jays should be playing Overbay, A-Gon, and Bautista, because they might fetch something in return at the trade deadline (especially if Bautista keeps having 2 HR, 5 RBI nights and Gonzalez maintains his 46 HR, 104 RBI pace).

With Magpie, not Wilner. And, this also gets to the point of what Magpie was saying yesterday. Even if a team is building for the future, there has to be some element of meritocracy to playing time. It doesn't have to a strict meritocracy or even a meritocracy at every position, but it is going to be hard to convince and keep the other players (and many fans) motivated and involved with a team if you completely ignore performance. Which is what Wilner seems to be advocating.

There is simply no reason not to give Alex Gonzalez regular playing time. Gonzalez has been on an absolute tear this season and to take him out of the lineup with any regularity is a silly proposition as this point, given he's been one of the team's best hitters. Now, we know he won't be over the course of the season, but I'm not sure what it's going to say in the clubhouse if he is moved into a quasi-platoon with McCoy.

Furthermore, Gonzalez (like Overbay and, to a lesser extent, Bautista) are players you can conceivably get something for at the deadline. There's no evidence Mike McCoy's upside is anything more than a utility player (this isn't a Randy Ruiz who repeatedly crushed the ball in the minors). I'll agree Ruiz should be playing instead of Overbay against LHP, provided he's not Ortiz at first base, but to argue that McCoy might be some kind of hidden gem seems silly. And one will have plenty of opportunity to figure out if that's the case over a full season anyhow. A

Also, Lewis is a bit of a moot point until we actually see what the team's plans are for him. He's played against both righties the team has faced since he got here and, while I have a feeling that is partially because of Encarnacion's injury, let's wait for the team to actually sit him before arguing he deserves more playing time.

I like Mike McCoy, but he ought not to be taking time from Gonzalez and Bautista. On the other hand, if the organization had to choose between McDonald and McCoy, I'd suggest that they go in alphabetical order.  Sunk cost and all that.

I'm definitely with Magpie on this one if only from a psychological standpoint.  What is the message being sent to the team if the Jays tank the season?  It's basically saying "we don't think this team can win".  Then, next year, as the second phase of the rebuilding plan kicks in, they go and tell these guys that "we think this team can win", meanwhile the roster is still made up of most of the players from the previous year who were told they couldn't win by the organization.  Sepcifically, I'm mostly concerned about the young, talented pitching staff. 

I think the message has to be "we want you to win as many games as you can not only this year, but going forward and we're always going to do our best to put you in the best position to do so."    

Specifically regarding Overybay, I know the team and some fans have come out in support of him, I think he has to stay in there if only for his defence.  He's proven that he can play at a high level and I believe that that factor alone has a huge impact on the pitching staff.  Same for Gonzalez.  The last thing you need is to demoralize a young pitcher by wasting his solid starts because of bad defence. 

Playing Ruiz instead of Overbay sounds fine.

Playing McCoy instead of Gonzalez is ridiculous. McCoy looks to be nothing other than a utility guy going forward, so why bench someone off to a good start to play him?

And, again, they should not sit Bautista to play Lewis. They should sit Encarnacion to play Lewis.

I always think that the solution to playing-time dilemmas is to involve as many players as possible. We're talking about five positions here, right? 1B, 3B, DH, LF and RF. For those five positions, we have seven players: Overbay, Ruiz, Encarnacion, Bautista, Lewis, Lind, and Snider. So they each get to start five games out of every seven. That's still a lot of playing time for everybody, and in fact it's more, because there will be games where one of them will pinch hit for somebody, and there will be games where one of the seven is too injured to play anyway. Gives people days off, lets you play with platoon advantages, makes sure everyone's still fresh in September. Why not?

I don't know what Wilner's preferences are in the smoking department (happy 4/20!)... playing Lewis makes sense, to me. Let Cito see if he can bring out the 08 Lewis. The guy is fast and has at least a couple of years left.

Not playing Bautista, does not make sense. Sending down E5... makes a ton of sense. Alex Gonzalez v2.0 looks fine to me.

Ruiz v. Overbay whatever, but at the end of May perhaps Wallace forces things and Overbay is waived.

Hopefully Hill will be back soon, if not we'll see many more series like the California Angels series.

And remember, just because this is a "building year" (what does that even mean?) that's not an excuse to win games.

Someone mentioned psychology -- that'll sort it out. That's the one area of Cito's managing, I believe, that is pretty sound. He'll sort it out. What about last year? Well...

Am I the only one who thinks this lineup pretty much writes itself? That's it's pretty obvious?

* = should be pretty much strictly platooned

1. LF Lewis*
2. 2B Hill
3. DH Lind
4. CF Wells
5. 1B Overbay*
6. 3B Encarnacion
7. RF Snider
8. C Buck
9. SS Gonzalez

• PH Ruiz (1B/DH)
• UT Bautista (CF/RF/LF/3B)
• UT McCoy (SS/2B)
• C Molina (C)

Not sure what the big question marks are.

And I find myself disagreeing with Wilner more and more with each passing day. I have no idea where he comes up with some of the ideas that he does. I have no idea why he thinks 29 year old Bautista is old news, while 32, 29, and 29 year olds Ruiz/McCoy/Lewis are part of the future. Sorry, Mike, but the reality is that these guys are all in the same boat - intriguing borderline players who all deserve a real shot at this level, but none off whom deserves any precedence over other roster players based on some weird idea of these 29-32 year olds being "part of the future".

I guess if Bautista keeps up his newfound ability v. RHP then maybe he takes over the starting 3B job from EE, or maybe Bautista makes a better platoon partner at 1B for Overbay than Ruiz does, but other than than Bautista I think it's pretty straightforward.

A Snider emergence would allow him to flip spots with Overbay (or ideally the Overbay Platoon) as well.

And of course, since we all know that JMac isn't going anywhere thanks to that stupid contract, that means McCoy won't bet here. In that case, though, I think I'd rather see Bautista backing up at 2B when needed instead of JMac anyways.

 

Right now the key is the under 28's. These guys will be in their prime for the 2011-2014 window the Jays are looking at (2011 the earliest for contention, 2014 the latest for this wave if AA wants to keep a job - 2014 also the final year for Hill & Wells and near the end for Lind's deal - 28 year old this year will be 32 in the final year). 29 year olds are pushing it, 30+ are place holders.

Age 25 season or less and on the roster...
22-Travis Snider
25-Brandon Morrow, Ricky Romero

Age 26-28 season or less...
26-Adam Lind, Dana Eveland
27-Edwin Encarnacion
28-Aaron Hill, Casey Janssen, Merkin Valdez, Jeremy Accardo, Shaun Marcum

The 'could be useful, but take a B prospect if you can' 29-31 year olds...
29-Mike McCoy, Jose Bautista, Jeremy Reed, Fred Lewis, John Buck
31-Vernon Wells (no one is 30)

32+ should be traded if a C or better prospect is there...
32-Randy Ruiz, Jason Frasor, Kevin Gregg, Brian Tallet
33-Alex Gonzalez, Lyle Overbay
34-Scott Downs, Shawn Camp
35-Jose Molina, John McDonald

Nothing shocking here really. Encarnacion is in a make or break season - this is the last chance he'll get at full-time play if he can't show himself to be a solid player. Seeing how only Snider is sub-25 puts a big ! on the need to get good quick or it will be too late for this crew.

For a quick comparison, Tampa Bay has 4 24 year olds, 2 25's, 9 in the 26-28 range, 5 in the 29-31, and 6 in the 32+ category. The Yankees have used 4 24 year olds, 1 25, 3 in the 26-28 range, 6 in the 29-31 range, and 11 in the 32+ category (7 are 35+).

I like McCoy. He's put up some nice stats in AAA the last few years. Has plus speed and good on-base skills. Sure he's old but some players just bloom late. Same with Bautista and Ruiz. They don't need to be full-time players to have a valuable future with the team.

http://www.thebaseballcube.com/players/M/Mike-McCoy.shtml

John you have got to be freaking kidding me if you think the return in a trade is solely dependent on age?

You honestly think that McCoy, Reed and Buck are worth a B level prospects but Downs, Gregg, and Frasor are only worth C's.

Most sources out there are saying you could get a #4-8 prospect in a system for any of those relief pitchers.

I'd be surprised if you got anything for Reed. Maybe a 35th round pick.

a Lewis/Wells/Snider outfield with Bautista at 3B should produce similar if not better defensive numbers than a Snider/Wells/Bautista with EE at 3B look.

If that's true, there's no reason to sit EE. Specifically, if S/W/B with EE at third produces an equivilant amount of defensive value, then L/W/S/EE should be close enough for the added offense to be of value.

As to the original question, I'll take the players by position:

Hill - no comment, duh.
Lind - ditto.
Wells  - defensive concerns aside, he's not moving so why wate time talking about it?

Snider - I'd play him every day, unless an attitude, work ethic, or mechanical problem made it wise to send him down. if he's up, he needs to play. And with the arrival of Lewis, I'd play him in RF.

Lewis - speaking of, I'd platoon him with Bautista in LF (I think the value of not flipping Snider back and forth trumps the defensive upgrade in RF in 25% of games) and lead-off whoever is playing. I think Wilner is right about getting all we can out of lewis, not because he's young or because he's part of "The Plan" but because he does well that which Bautista does not.
He is, at a minimum, as worthy of playing time as JB. they are relatively the same age and both have enough at bats that we know what they are.
Combined, Flose Lewtista is an excellent LF and a very solid above average bat in the lead-off spot. I can't see ANY argument for not platooning them. Neither has to be "te future" to be a valuable contributer for the next couple of years.

Overbay - Is not going to start hitting LHP because he gets to play every day. Cito is slow to change his lineup and by the time he gives up and starts platooning O'bay it will be coming up on the trade deadline. I'd be for building value but proving what informed observers already know doesn't do that.
If I were the manager, he'd be platooning from now on (Ruiz until and unless he fails)and If I were the GM it would be a given that O'bay were dealt in July if I could get any taker.

Gonzalez - he's hot now and I wouldn't mess with the hot hand. best case scenario is he stays hot and another team comes up with a need. If i get a reasonable trade offer for him i take it and put McCoy out there every day. More on McCoy below. Hopefully at some point in July we can get good value for him.

Bautista - see Lewis

Ruiz - I'd platoon him with O'bay every time we face a lefty until he proves he can't do that job, plus occasionally spot him in to rest Lind and Snider (with Flose moving to RF on those days). If he fails, I call Dopirak and get a look at him in the same role. Once Overbay is gone (hopefully in July) then if Wallace is ready I call him, if not I ride out Ruiz(Dopirak) until he is or the end of the year.

Encarnacion - He's a noteably better hitter than Bautista, and he's almost 3 years younger. As much as I don't really care much about him, he's WAY more likely to be part of "the future" in the near term than Bautista is.
YES his defense (especially throwing) isn't good, but he sometimes looks great too and Butterfield made his reputation by improving infield defense so let him try (and he can do nothing if EE doesn't get reps).
the most nonsensical thing I see Jays' fans saying is that they want to sit EE in favor of Bautista (who's no defensive genius himself). Of the two, EE is the far more likely to step up and have a really good year. Bautista shouldn't ever be over here except in cases of injuries or rest days.

Buck/Molina - nothing to say here except to look forward to JPA forcing the issue. Best case scenario is that he does and Buck can get us a couple of nickles in July.

McDonald - meh, what can be said?

McCoy - no he's not young and no he's not the future. But he's younger than Gonzalez, and faster than anyone else on the team. There is SOME (small) possibility that he could take a Scutaro like track, and i agree with Wilner that nothing is lost by finding that out this year. But I disagree with him on doing it NOW. Let Gonzo play every day and maintain his rep, particularly on defense, and look for a chance to sell high.

When that happens, by all means I'd run McCoy out there every day and see if I'd found money. If he did well enough to stopgap there until Adeniy arrives, that's tremendous value for a minor league signing.

In short:

C: Buck/Molina >> Arencibia if he proves ready
1B: O'bay/Ruiz >> Wallace if/as/when
2B: Hill
SS: Gonzo >> McCoy if/as/when
3B: EE (JB if we get a nice offer for EE in July)
LF Flose Lewtista
CF: Wells
RF: Snider
DH: Lind

vs. RHP

Lewis
Hill
Lind
Wells
Overbay
EE
Snider
Buck
Gonzo

vs LHP

Bautista
Hill
Lind
Wells
Ruiz
EE
Snider
Buck
Gonzo

Ideally, in the last week of August it would look like this

McCoy - SS
Lewtista - LF
Lind - DH
Wells - CF
Hill - 2B
Snider - RF
EE - 3B
Wallace - 1B
Arencibia - C

Upon reflection, it's not likely all 14 of those guys will be on the roster at once. So, if Cito would platoon Ruiz, I'd have to send down McCoy (or ditch McDonald which won't happen) and if he refuses to use Ruiz, i'd send him down and keep McCoy.

Since we are playing "you be the Manager (and by implication the GM) - my choice would be to waive McDonald.

the most nonsensical thing I see Jays' fans saying is that they want to sit EE in favor of Bautista (who's no defensive genius himself). Of the two, EE is the far more likely to step up and have a really good year. Bautista shouldn't ever be over here except in cases of injuries or rest days.

You confuse liking JB over EE with assuming Cito is in love with Bautista and must start him, therefore you look for the best place for that to be with this team. And that means EE to the bench, since it shouldn't be Lewis/Ruiz/Snider that lose the playing time because Bautista must play.

Tonight's lineup : Lewis-Gonzalez-Lind-Wells-Overbay-Bautista-Buck-Snider-McCoy. Lovin' the early opportunity for Lewis and hope it continues.

they want to sit EE in favor of Bautista (who's no defensive genius himself).

Of the two, Bautista is noticeably better at third base. You can argue whether it overrides Encarnacion's potential with the bat, but there is a gulf between the two at third, whatever you think of Bautista's glove objectively.

McCoy - no he's not young and no he's not the future. But he's younger than Gonzalez, and faster than anyone else on the team. There is SOME (small) possibility that he could take a Scutaro like track, and i agree with Wilner that nothing is lost by finding that out this year. But I disagree with him on doing it NOW. Let Gonzo play every day and maintain his rep, particularly on defense, and look for a chance to sell high.

I don't think anybody disagrees with this. Not one poster in this thread has. Nobody has said keep Gonzalez in the face of a good trade offer or that McCoy is not the best bet to replace him short-term. What we all disagree with is Wilner's idea that this should be done now. And that sort of agreement is rare, even on the Box.

Yeah, went a bit nuts with the age thing there - price of posting in a rush rather than thinking it through. The key point though is that guys like Downs & Frasor will not be part of a contenting team here barring a major surprise. Thus you either trade or let them go as a B or A free agent. In trade I seriously doubt they are really worth an A prospect though even though it has been talked about. Perhaps at the deadline to a contender who has a rapidly shrinking window and a desperate need in the pen, but otherwise I'd be shocked if AA got a top prospect for any reliever outside of via the leaving as a free agent/gain a draft pick method. Which is why I was saying earlier on that if he can get something good for these guys then drain the pen and live with a horrid one for 2010.

I don't get this whole idea of people saying that "Cito is in love with Bautista", implying that he is somehow unreasonably playing Bautista when he doesn't deserve it.

The truth of the matter is that it took 2/3 of a season of part time work before Bautista started playing every day for Cito (maybe Cito was just playing hard to get?) - but since day one in the starting lineup, Bautista has flat out been awesome. Like .900ops awesome.

Bautista took over fulltime duties mid-to-late august. I'm not going to get out the calculator for the august numbers, but in the full months since Bautista has been a full-time starter for Cito, he has done this:

• SEP: 96ab, .933ops
• OCT: 13ab, 1.026ops
• ST: 57ab, 1.343ops
• APR: 51ab, .840ops

And he's done this while showing star-level defense at any position he's asked to play.

Cito isn't showing Bautista some unhealthy manlove - it's just that Bautista has done nothing but continue to earn more playing time the more playing time Cito gives him.

I'm all for being skeptical that Bautista can keep up this kind of performance, especially against RHP......but there's simply no denying that Bautista has been great since he first entered the starting lineup late last year, and that Cito would almost be silly NOT to keep putting him in there.

I still mentally slot him in as the bench utility guy, with a LHP speciality, but I don't let that fool me into not realizing that the guy has certainly been fully deserving of a starting spot since the first day that Cito made him a starter, and that Cito would have to be stupid to bench him undeservedly, especially with so many other players struggling at the plate.

 

Agreed with uglyone.

Also, how is Encarnacion "a noteably better hitter than Bautista?" He hasn't hit much the last two years, and his peak wasn't really that impressive given his godawful defense.

Also, how is Encarnacion "a noteably better hitter than Bautista?" He hasn't hit much the last two years, and his peak wasn't really that impressive given his godawful defense.

In fairness to Edwin, Encarnacion had a wrist injury last year and that brought him down to about the same level as Bautista's career numbers. Bautista is a league-average or a touch below-average bat. Encarnacion is worth about 10 runs above average when he has healthy wrists and has just turned 27. Defense doesn't really have anything to do with his value offensively, buy yeah, it's bad. Of course, the fielding numbers for Bautista aren't that hot, either... he just doesn't give me the yips when I see him throw across the diamond.

If healthy, Encarnacion is a notably better hitter (by just about any metric, 10 runs, 20 pts wOBA, 50 pts OPS, 10-15 pts OPS+), not much worse of a fielder (according to UZR) and a couple years younger to boot. Neither should be a long term solution for this team, however, so it's all about building trade value for each of them.

Why not use Ruiz as PH?

That Vernon Wells fella... I had forgotten that he can actually play the game a little.

Tomorrow should be a good test for the new-and-improved Vernon. He's a career 211/211/263 hitter against Greinke.

EE's career number are slightly better, however, Bautista is currently playing above that.

EE is like Overbay and Wells. He's had a below average year following an injury and is still trying to bounce back. It's hard to know if he's peaked or not.
What do we know about his arm injury? Can he work on making better throws if his arm is bothering him?

Btw, is Hill rehabbing yet?

Back from tonight's game. Lordy, is the Royals' defense awful: they basically gifted the Jays the tying run in the seventh.

I couldn't be happier for Vernon. He's always seemed like a nice guy. And now he's hitting everything they throw at him. His homer was on a low breaking ball that hung out over the plate; he then turned on a fastball for a double. Then he pulled a pitch down the line for another double.

One thing I noticed about Gregg versus Frasor - between pitches, Gregg doesn't waste time. He gets the ball back, and is ready to deliver right then and there. Frasor tends to grab the return throw and march around the mound a bit, which looks less assertive.

The Jays might not be a good team this year, but they're way better than the Royals. Or Baltimore.

but there is a gulf between the two at third

....and Bautista looked like an iron glove on a grounder tonight, of course.

Bautista has earned his playing time with production.

No idea if Lewis can be the center fielder and leadoff guy we need going forward. We'll want to see, but he's more Coco Crisp than he is Alex Rios, I think.

I think Ruiz can really, truly hit. Ortiz started a bit late, and I wonder if Ruiz can be in that mold. If we give him the at bats, I think 20-25 HR will follow. Maybe more. And if it does, we can either keep him, or get something for him. But he has to get the at-bats.

The dilemma is that the Jays think Overbay might be worth something at trade deadline for his record, if he can recover. I say that if he isn't recovered by mid-June into something that might fetch a trade, bite the bullet and cut him, and start investing at-bats in Ruiz.

I think McCoy makes more sense on the bench than John McDonald does.

I think Ruiz can really, truly hit. Ortiz started a bit late...

Sure, but nowhere near this late. Ruiz is less than two years younger than Ortiz, who's been knocking the crap out of major league pitching for quite a number of years now. Actually, Ruiz is now the same age Ortiz was when Big Pop-Up's production began its drastic decline. Neither strikes me as the type of hitter who would age particularly well, and both are certifiably aging.

It's weird that a guy (Ruiz) has a career line of 304/378/530 in the minors, yet has never really been given a shot in the majors. I suppose if he had some defensive skills, he would have been recalled long ago.