I'm assuming that the Jays are just being wisely patient with Emaus and Bowman.  Give them another month or two at their respective levels, then promote them.  By the end of this season, I hope we've seen the following:  a 2-month tryout for Hoffpauir in the majors; a 2-month tryout for Emaus in the majors; and a 2-month tryout for Bowman at AAA.   Depending which of them impresses, any of those tryouts could be extended, or Bowman could even get a taste of the majors by September.  Then the Jays will have a much better sense of their 3B options for 2011.

Of course if Snider is fully recovered by the all-star break, Bautista could be switched back to 3B and the prospect tryouts could be curtailed.  But given the frustrating slowness of Snider's recovery, I have a feeling that there's plenty of time for look-sees at Emaus and Hoffpauir.

I'm with China Fan. Hoffpauir is a utility guy that the Jays are looking to capitalize on recent strong play ; Emaus is an actual prospect they are still looking to develop. Jarrett is the better place holder until Snider returns, at which point you'd assume if everyone is healthy that Bautista gets moved to 3B the majority of the time unless Encarnacion has shown a new dedication by then and is called back up. I love Hoffpauir's K zone control, and in light of the fact Richard Griffin keeps writing and saying on radio interviews that Aaron Hill would prefer not to bat #2, here's the order I'd go with.

Lewis, Hoffpauir, Hill, Wells, Lind, Bautista, Overbay, Gonzalez, Buck

What's the benefit of the DFA? Richmond had about another 3 weeks before he needed to be added to the 40...

Is this an Alex Rios situation, where the Jays will give Encarnacion to any team that is willing to pay his salary?

Alternatively, will the Jays agree to pay the rest of Encarnacion's salary if the other team coughs up a prospect?

I heard Alan Ashby on the Fan today and he was debating with McCown whether Encarnacion was sent down because of lack of hustle, as well as his poor play.  They had noted several instances of EE not running out pop-ups or foul balls.

Everyone is saying that EE is going to Vegas but if someone is interested they might as well trade him for something.  I believe EE is a free agent at the end of the year and he won't be back.  If the Jays have to eat his salary to trade him they would have to do that anyway if he goes to AAA.

Maybe we can get Scott Boras to spread rumors about the teams that want to get in on EE. I hear the Mets, Yankees, Angels, Cubs and Orioles have been linked to him, but you always have to watch out for the mystery team.

Yeah, that's true, but how much of the apparent improvement is really just Overbay's ability to pick it? Does either stat account for throwing accuracy beyond errors?

China & Stevieboy,

Diaz is on his way back to AA. He is joining New Hampshire in Harrisburg tomorrow, according the the Fisher Cat web site.   

http://www.nhfishercats.com/news.php?a=371

His glove, not his hitting, will bring him back to AAA eventually, I predict.

Good riddance - not only lousy performance but lousy attitude.He has no future with the Jays - if he is still with the team at season's end, he will be

non-tendered.

This looks like a cost savings measure: By putting Richmond back on the 40 men roster and optioning him the Jays save his salary.

Saving around 40k by shipping him out 2 weeks early reeks. If this team with a heavily reduced payroll was so worried about the bean-counting that it would lead to slap in the faces like this they had no business tendering E5 a contract. There's utility in keeping your soldiers happy.

Caring about Richmond's status in 2015 is puzzling and shouldn't be a reason.

Well, if you have a chance to gain a year control and save $40k or whatever and ferret out interest in an expensive player that doesn't fit into your plans long term, why not?

Yes but it's the 20 days MLB pay Richmond is being screwed out of for no apparent reason that concerns me - they could still have depressed his service time by keeping him down in the minors for as long as they wanted after the 30 day injury exemption. And since we love talking options here, they potentially burned one on Richmond if over the next 3 starts he proves something and the Jays wanted to call him up for a start in place of one of the current starters due to injury.

Checking the Jays site it seems Richmond is still on the 40 man roster (Encarnacion has been removed). This suggests I was wrong on my reading of the data - he is on rehab and still getting his ML salary and service time. Hopefully he does well and is pitching up here shortly after the AS break.

Not to get too off topic or be unkind, but why? Obviously one should want players to succeed, and there is certainly no reason to root for them to fail (A-Rod excepted, of course) but Richmond is a 31 year old journeyman who has barely performed at replacement level in 160 major league innings, There is no way he fits into the team's long term plans, certainly not as a starter. The team is, at the moment, rolling out five starters in their age 24, 25, 26, 26, and 29 seasons, all of whom are doing well and have at least two more seasons of being under team control left. This is not to mention Zep and Mills, 25, Stewart, 24, Drabek, 23, Jenkins 23 and Henderson Alvarez 20.  I shudder to think that the Jays might somehow see fit to put Richmond back in the rotation, just as they briefly did with Tallet when he came back from injury. Whether this is a rebuilding year or not, why go with proven mediocrity over potential goodness? This was something the team sort of figured out by the end of the JP era; lets hope its not soon forgotten.

This is the first thing AA has done yet that really has me mystified.

I don't get this move at all.

EE has been far from bad this year - and the only bad thing about his performance (his batting average) has likely been due to horrendously low Babip luck.  Other than that likely Babip-savaged AVG, his walk rate and power have been excellent.

And his much-maligned defense has been at least average by any measurement not just this year, but ever since he came to the Jays.

Pretty harsh for EE - he gets waived while outperforming our two "young stars" Hill and Lind, at the same age as them, with a similar track as theirs, and a better contract.

bad move. first time I've said that about anything AA has done.

Hoffpauir better be able to perform, or else we just made our team worse for no reason at all.

Yes but it's the 20 days MLB pay Richmond is being screwed out of for no apparent reason that concerns me

No offense to Richmond who seems like a great guy, but this isn't exactly one of the great injustices in the world. As for creating turmoil amongst the soldiers, it didn't seem to affect Romero or Janssen last year who had the same thing happen last year for 7 and 18 days respectively.

 As for creating turmoil amongst the soldiers, it didn't seem to affect Romero or Janssen last year who had the same thing happen last year for 7 and 18 days respectively.

I really hope you don't think it didn't affect those guys because of their performances this year, because that really isn't proof of anything. As well, Janssen & Romero have each made significantly more $ from the Blue Jays than has Richmond, who presumably feels the 45k loss much more. If the Jays really wanted to save money they could have optioned Richmond immediately, I don't understand waiting for the EE situation to do so. And please don't tell me it's to make sure other teams don't scoop up Reidier Gonzalez.

....the only bad thing about his performance (his batting average) has likely been due to horrendously low Babip luck.....

I know you've been defending EE for the past 12 months, but I'm surprised that you're clinging to this defence in the face of the near-universal acclaim for AA's decision to demote him.  If you want to talk about luck, it's much more likely that EE's supposedly good OPS is due to the fluke of those three games in May where he hit 5 home runs.  Subtract those three games, and his season looks pretty dreadful, no matter which number you choose to use.  In fact, it's interesting to compare his Reds season in 2009 and his Jays season in 2010.  The numbers are frighteningly similar, and in both cases the Reds and Jays decided to get rid of him.  

Encarnacion in 2009 for the Reds:  165 plate appearances; .209 batting average; .333 OBP; .374 SLG; .707 OPS.

Encarnacion in 2010 for the Jays:  141 plate appearances; .200 batting average; .298 OBP; .467 SLG; .765 OPS.

The only real difference between the two seasons is the higher SLG this season, and that's almost entirely due to his 3-homer game on May 21.

....pretty harsh for EE - he gets waived while outperforming our two "young stars" Hill and Lind.....

Outperforming?   I suppose if you take the small sample size of 2010 and ignore the big sample size of 2009, you could "prove" a lot of things about Lind and Hill.  Personally, I would tend to accept the Jays assessment of EE's performance in 2010 and the likely future performance of Hill, Lind and Encarnacion.

Lind OPS in 2009:  .932.

Hill OPS in 2009:   .829.

Encarnacion OPS in 2009:   .748.

I really hope you don't think it didn't affect those guys because of their performances this year, because that really isn't proof of anything.

That's quite presumptive. I was reasoning that since there was no outward turmoil indicated, they (especially Romero) have spoken positively since, and any behind the scenes stuff would have been known by the organization and yet they still decided to demote him, I feel ok with my assumption in this case.

As for the Richmond, EE, Gonzalez situation, this afforded opportunity with benefits. I'm sure Gonzalez won't be a major roadblock if something else comes up, but why turf him right now if there's another option?

So you want Richmond to come out to the media and complain about this? That will do him a lot of good....

I must have missed the articles where Romero spoke positively about losing his MLB pay for a week for no reason. And you ignore the fact that Janssen/Richmond are a lot more financially secure (or at least should be) than Richmond.

Outperforming?   I suppose if you take the small sample size of 2010 and ignore the big sample size of 2009, you could "prove" a lot of things about Lind and Hill.  Personally, I would tend to accept the Jays assessment of EE's performance in 2010 and the likely future performance of Hill, Lind and Encarnacion.

Lind OPS in 2009:  .932.

Hill OPS in 2009:   .829.

Encarnacion OPS in 2009:   .748.

Yes, if we look at last year, and only last year, then Hill and Lind are better. But why would we do that?

2010

• EE (27): 141pa, .765ops, 106ops+, .329wOBA
• Lind (26):  285pa, .634ops, 72ops+, .280wOBA
• Hill (28): 247pa, .659ops, 79ops+, .295wOBA

Career

• EE (27): 2322pa, .788ops, 102ops+, .344wOBA
• Lind (26): 1664pa, .799ops, 111ops+, .342wOBA
• Hill (28): 2880pa, .761ops, 100ops+, .332wOBA

Two of these guys are young building blocks, and the other gets waived. weird.

....two of these guys are young building blocks, and the other gets waived. weird...

It's not weird at all.  The career numbers don't tell you anything about the current status of these guys.  Encarnacion had decent hitting seasons from the ages of 23 to 25.  Then he went into steady decline, and he's shown nothing (aside from a single game on May 21) to suggest that his decline is over.   Lind and Hill, on the other hand, weren't so good at the age of 23 or 24, but they've had excellent seasons as recently as 2009.   Obviously AA considers that 2009 is a more significant year than 2006, especially when projecting the future.  What's weird about that?

By the way, it's a bit weird to argue that EE should stay on the team because he's performing the same as the worst-hitting players in the lineup.  Everyone knows that Hill and Lind are having terrible seasons.  If they fail to improve within a month or two, obviously they're going to be in trouble -- Lind in particular, since he's the easiest to replace.  Lind and Hill are getting a bit more leeway than EE because both of them had monster seasons in 2009, and EE hasn't had a monster season since 2006.  When you claim that Lind and Hill are regarded as "building blocks", you're introducing a red herring.  Most critics of EE aren't necessarily defenders of Hill and Lind, especially in their 2010 incarnations.  It doesn't logically follow that a critic of EE must somehow be a defender of the 2010 seasons of Lind and Hill.

I don't even know what you're arguing about now. What the heck does "defender of Hill and Lind" have to do with anything?

And how do career numbers not matter for three players the same age? and how does this year's performance not matter for three players the same age?

I think the numbers I posted make a perfectly clear case as to why waiving the guy is silly.  Just like waiving Lind or Hill would be silly.

and you can keep harping about EE's "one big game", but if you give that same "one big game" to Lind and Hill, their numbers STILL aren't as good as EE's.

....I think the numbers I posted make a perfectly clear case as to why waiving the guy is silly.  Just like waiving Lind or Hill would be silly....

You're completely ignoring the points that I made.  Just to summarize again:  Encarnacion hasn't had an excellent season since 2006.   He's been in steady decline since then.  By focusing on career numbers, and a couple months of 2010, you're ignoring the obvious fact that Lind and Hill have improved since 2006, while Encarnacion has declined.

But I'm glad you've at last revealed your main point:  you believe that Encarnacion is actually as good as Lind and Hill, based on numbers that are weighted heavily to the early years of their careers.  Interestingly, in previous discussions of the Rolen trade, you argued that Encarnacion was as good a hitter as Scott Rolen, and the only significant difference was their salaries.  It seems that the Jays and the Reds must be both equally "silly" for failing to understand that Encarnacion is as good as Lind, Hill and Rolen.  So, according to you, there should be a clamor of baseball managers who are eager to trade for Encarnacion. Let's see what happens on the waiver wire -- unless all the other managers, too, are as "silly" as the Jays and Reds.

But really, where's your sympathies for poor Reidier?

Now you've lost me, because I'm the one who DIDN'T want Richmond counting towards the 40 before he had to be.

Spelled out more succinctly, I was saying that this has been done in the past, with no public discontent, and the people who would know if there was private discontent or not decided to demote Richmond.

And therefore we should trust that there was no private discontent in those cases? What if there was, and the Jays management just doesn't care? How is that not a possibility? I assure you when Scott Richmond got the call from his agent and was told he was officially optioned to A he asked him why and was told this will save the Blue Jays 45k on his salary. The facts that Romero & Janssen didn't publicly complain (which would be insane) and that the Jays continue to employ this practice speaks nothing towards the sensibility of the decision, unless you just assume that everything a MLB office does is correct.

The Reidier sympathies thing was your position taken to an absurd and humorous (to me, anyway) degree. A straw-man to do battle with your hay-hominid, if you will.

As for the rest of your points: a) why are we to assume that your behind-the-scenes look is the most obvious when there is no evidence anywhere? b) It's not just that they're not complaining, everything they say regarding the franchise and the team are positive, Romero gushingly so. I don't see any evidence of unhappy soldiers in those two... They're not Accardo, after all.

Could there be an issue? Sure. Given a complete lack of knowledge of the inner workings, no signs outwardly, precedent (and experience as to whether this issue typically raises conflict), why are your assurances gospel?

The Reidier sympathies thing was your position taken to an absurd and humorous (to me, anyway) degree.

And has no relevance, because nobody suggested Reidier should have been removed from the 40. I merely mentioned him to explain that once the team doesn't care about the player, which is clear as evidenced by how they treated Richmond, they wasted 22k paying Richmond an MLB salary for the first 10 days of his rehab, because there was no reason he couldn't be immediately added to the 40. If you're going to cut corners, do it right!

why are your assurances gospel?

My assurance wasn't related to how the player feels - it was only about it being explained to him why the Jays optioned him 20 days earlier than they needed to.

You ask for instances of player discontent with management - well Accardo is clearly one of them, and I remember Erik Bedard being pissed at the Orioles for the way they manipulated his service time, leaving him exactly one day shy of being eligible for free agency.

You're completely ignoring the points that I made.  Just to summarize again:  Encarnacion hasn't had an excellent season since 2006.   He's been in steady decline since then.  By focusing on career numbers, and a couple months of 2010, you're ignoring the obvious fact that Lind and Hill have improved since 2006, while Encarnacion has declined.

You're making grossly oversimplified generalizations about trends to try and paint a picture that's not reality.

There has been no "steady decline" from EE - he was good, then he was injured and bad, and now he's bounced back to somewhere in between in a very small sample since injury.

There has been no "steady improvement" from Hill and Lind either, both have been good, then bad, then good, and now back to bad again.

But I'm glad you've at last revealed your main point:  you believe that Encarnacion is actually as good as Lind and Hill, based on numbers that are weighted heavily to the early years of their careers.  Interestingly, in previous discussions of the Rolen trade, you argued that Encarnacion was as good a hitter as Scott Rolen, and the only significant difference was their salaries.  It seems that the Jays and the Reds must be both equally "silly" for failing to understand that Encarnacion is as good as Lind, Hill and Rolen.  So, according to you, there should be a clamor of baseball managers who are eager to trade for Encarnacion. Let's see what happens on the waiver wire -- unless all the other managers, too, are as "silly" as the Jays and Reds.

Well, I'll ignore your childish mis-characterizations of my previous arguments in your childish attempts to beat your chest, and agree with you that absolute yes, any GM would be wise to pick up EE for free right now, just like AA was wise to pick up Fred Lewis for free a couple months back (and yes the GMs' decisions to let Lewis go for free and/or pass over him were also "silly").

.....now he's bounced back to somewhere in between....

It's pretty hard to debate with someone who's convinced that a .298 OBP is evidence that EE has "bounced back" to "somewhere in between."

What you guys probably heard on the radio, I mean, we don't tell you guys who's knees are hurting them or who's legs are hurting, because then the opposition knows about it.

What is the opposition going to do if they know E5 has wonky knees, take a bat to them? How is this any sort of an explanation? And how did the Jays not learn their lesson from Vernon last year, who apparently played injured the entire year and provided negative value on the field? Why is a non-contender running out players who can't play at 100%?

One thought: I don't know what the time table for his possible return was but it could be that the Jays expected to have him up in 20 days and now see that this is not going to happen and decided that if you option him anyways, you might as well option him now.

Certainly plausible, but this basically assumes the Jays were planning on demoting Janssen for Richmond, because I can't see any other spot in the bullpen he could take. It also makes no sense in light of the fact they were stretching him out as a starter and having him throw every 5 days. I think it's way more likely the Jays decided to use E5's demotion as a chance to save 45k at the expense of Richmond.