Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
The Seattle Mariners have fired manager Don Wakamatsu, pitching coach Rick Adair, and bench coach Ty Van Burkleo.

If ever there was a case of a general manager totally screwing things up six ways to Sunday, and passing the blame along to the most convenient nearby scapegoat - this would be it. Jack Zduriencik completely misjudged the quality of his team (he could have asked me, I would have told him the 2009 Mariners were a lousy team who got really, really lucky.) As well as being required to count on Milton Bradley - and when has counting on Milton Bradley ever worked - Wakamatsu was saddled with an utterly useless player whom he was nevertheless expected to pencil into the lineup as the everyday DH. When Wakamatsu got tired of giving away games because Ken Griffey was completely washed up, he got no support from management. Griffey is an icon in the game in general, and Seattle in particular, and Wakamatsu actually lost the clubhouse when he tried to ease Griffey out of the lineup (ballplayers are not necessarily rational beings, and Griffey's teammates actually wanted him to keep playing.) His GM should have had his back, but he was covering his own ass then and he's covering his own ass now.

The Morrow for League and Chavez deal isn't looking all that brilliant this week, but I'm sure the timing of this move is entirely coincidental. Entirely.
Wakamatsu Takes the Fall | 91 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Forkball - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 08:57 AM EDT (#220269) #
The deal isn't looking that great now, but Chavez seems to be having a really good year and has probably elevated his prospect status.
Gerry - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 09:08 AM EDT (#220270) #
Most reporters still have a high opinion of Wakamatsu, blaming the front office.  So does Wakamatsu make it onto AA's manager short-list?  Should he?  I don't know enough to say yes or no but some of our west coast bauxites might have an opinion.
John Northey - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 09:26 AM EDT (#220274) #
League isn't doing too bad - 3.10 ERA over 52 games, 2.9 BB/9 vs 6.2 K/9 (lower than last year but in line with the rest of his ML career).

Johermyn Chavez is 21 in A+ hitting 312/380/575 in RF. A significant improvement over last season which was looking like a career year. However, he is in a good hitting environment as his team as a whole is hitting 297/359/472 with one guy hitting 377 over 201 PA (Nate Tenbrink - 1B/3B/LF/RF).

Wow has Seattle stunk. One hitter with an OPS+ over 100 with 120+ PA (Ichiro of course). Just 3 with 100+ over any number of PA (Sweeney & Langerhaus as well). Average age of hitters is 29.9 so it isn't like they were breaking in kids either. League is probably their best reliever right now, their rotation has been killer pre-Lee trade (Lee had a 173 ERA+, King Felix a 143, Jason Vargas 130, Fister 105, then for some reason Ryan Rowland-Smith was allowed onto to start 19 times with his 58 ERA+ and Ian Snell 9 starts with a 64 - David Pauley finally got a shot with his 121 but wasn't called up till the end of June).

Interesting team - horrid hitting, poor bullpen, great front 4 (now 3), nothing after that. Last years offense was almost as bad (90 OPS+ vs this years 77) while last years staff was great (112 ERA+ vs 102 this year). Looking at the rotation though you see 3 guys with K/9 under 5.5 who did well in 2009 and counting on those to keep doing well is a major risk as Jay fans have seen (Litsch, Chacin, Towers land in this area).

For 2010 Jays you see Romero & Marcum in the high 7's, Morrow over 10, Cecil at 6.6 K/9. Eveland & Litsch were both under 4.5, as is Mills so far. Rzep was at 10+ when demoted.
Anders - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 09:28 AM EDT (#220275) #

Most reporters still have a high opinion of Wakamatsu, blaming the front office.  So does Wakamatsu make it onto AA's manager short-list?  Should he?  I don't know enough to say yes or no but some of our west coast bauxites might have an opinion.

My conspiracy theory view is that at the end of the season, provided there is still some momentum (ie the Jays finish 5 games over .500 or so) is that the club gives Cito a 2-year extention. My reading of the situation with him "retiring" after this year was that the team kindof panicked when things fell apart at the end of last year, but didn't feel like they could just give Cito the axe after 200 games on account of his stature in Toronto. I admittedly don't know anything about the clubhouse morale and all that, but it seems at least from the outside that the team is playing well (and overachieving) and that the players are having fun.

It's a well known fact that all fans pretty much hate their managers until they win a lot or reach a status of being beyond reproach even if they do crazy stuff (the La Russa corollary). With that being said, I am pretty happy with the way things have gone with Cito. Once you accept that the team isn't going to pinch hit (only applicable when starters are sitting, otherwise no one to PH... and I guess that is sort of the point of an "off day") and that the bullpen usage is going to be very conventional (slave to the save) albeit with a willingness to deploy good guys in key situations before the ninth, I think he has been pretty good. He limits severely the amounts that Wise and McDonald play, has identified who the best guys are and a reasonable order to bat them in, and rides them heavily, and he has been very reasonable with the starting pitchers. He rarely bunts (although it is occasionally called for) and rarely calls for the IBB (thank goodness) two of my least favourite tactics. The offensive philosophy has worked pretty well to boot, and I give extra credit for Bautista, who know one really believed in.

TamRa - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 09:46 AM EDT (#220279) #
I can't argue against the idea that Cito will end up back but i'd tear my hair out.

I'll give him all due credit for things like believing in Bautista when almost none of us outsiders did. But that doesn't whitewash things like Millar at clean-up and McDonald in LF and letting Overbay do a Johnny-Mac impersonation against LHP when you have real issues finding everyone enough at-bats,and starting Wise of all people over Snider when Snider has already been hindered from enough playing time.


Cito probably gets more out of a roster than your average guy - but I can only take so much irrationality.

Moe - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 09:50 AM EDT (#220280) #
The question is whether Cito would want that. He could walk out after this successful year which boosts his legacy. There is a good chance the team will regress first before taking the next step -- young pitching breaks your heart and the style of offence the Jays play is more likely to be streaky than one build around a high OBS.

I hope I'm wrong but I expect next year's team's record to be slightly worse than this year's (with about the same underlying true winning potential, just because of luck fluctuating) and then a big step in 2012. If AA and/or Cito wound also see it this way, he is not coming back. And I would not be surprised if at least one side sees it this way. Plus, I think it would be good to have a manager who has a known track record of working with young kids.
Mick Doherty - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 09:55 AM EDT (#220281) #
Wak will (and should) get another shot to manage.
Magpie - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 10:11 AM EDT (#220284) #
Millar at clean-up

Never before, in the field of human conduct, has so much been made of... 43 at bats.

Conduct, conflict... whatever.
Moe - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 10:16 AM EDT (#220285) #
I don't think it's those 43 ABs. It's how they fit into the larger picture and the reasoning behind it. I'm sure if Mike Scioscia did it this in isolation, there would be much less complaining about it.

Nick Holmes - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 10:20 AM EDT (#220286) #
I'm with Moe on this.
I think Gaston has a lot invested in leaving on a high note, and 2010 reeks of overachievement. Next year may be a bit more of a dogfight in the division too, if Baltimore gets it together and the other guys fall to earth.
Enjoy the games, and let the team develop.
Nick Holmes - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 10:24 AM EDT (#220287) #
...I meant with this being Gaston's last year.
The 43 at bats, and managerial second-guessing in general doesn't really engage me one way or the other.
John Northey - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 10:24 AM EDT (#220288) #
Wonder if Cito will be the Jays 'Billy Martin' - namely, the guy you bring in whenever things are not going well. The old Yankees used to do that whenever things got too complacent. The Jays would be doing it to settle things down and basically put a veteran hand behind the wheel. It would be an interesting role for him.
lexomatic - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 10:31 AM EDT (#220290) #
the ting i find interesting, and it's hard to say if the hitters were going to suck anyways, but Wak, switched Figgins from  3b where he has been considered top 5 fielder for 2 years to 2b where he has stunk by the numbers. Lopez took his place at 3b (from 2b) and while I haven't looked at the numnbers, or even seen a mariners game to talk about eyeball fielding, it's possible that being in unfamiliar (figgins has played 2b before but i don't think on a regular basis for a few years) helped with the hitting decline. figgins also has an good/bad years pattern.
it seemed like a peculiar move at the time.
i don't think anybody expected the players to hit AS badly as they have. kotchmann probaly was expecterd to hit 270 with good defense and a little obp, and others were probably expected to repeat what they'd done for the past few. i think they bounce back offensively next year. assumign players dont' get traded/released.

Magpie - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 10:33 AM EDT (#220291) #
the reasoning behind it.

The reasoning behind it - he'd rather not juggle the rest of the lineup (we saw Joe Maddon doing the same thing with his cleanup hitter this weekend) - is one of those things that no one can possibly know, one way or the other, whether it's a positive thing or a negative thing. No one can possibly know.
Mike Green - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 10:35 AM EDT (#220292) #
Cito probably gets more out of a roster than your average guy - but I can only take so much irrationality.

My tolerance of harmless irrationality has gone up as I get older.  The question always is- does the Manager help or hinder, on balance, help or hinder a particular club.  In Gaston's case, the answer pretty clearly is for some clubs, he is an obvious help and for some others, not so much. 

I do think that the Arnsberg-Gaston partnership did not work as well as the Walton-Gaston partnership is working.   I suspect that the stress of the difficult partnership last year did not help Gaston's frame of mind and contributed to some of the unfortunate events. 
Magpie - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 10:44 AM EDT (#220293) #
My tolerance of harmless irrationality has gone up as I get older.

Good for you - it's very important to try to preserve one's mental flexibility as one ages! Trust me on this!

Something else that's at work here is that because we tend to focus rather closely on the day-to-day operations of this one team in particular, we are acutely aware of every decision that seems off or irrational or (most often) not-what-we-would-have-done. But I can absolutely guarantee that if we were paying as close attention to Joe Girardi or Terry Francona or Joe Maddon, we'd be hearing the exact same thing. I can guarantee it because it's what the people who do follow those teams actually say about Girardi and Francona and Maddon. There is no difference whatsoever.
Chuck - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 10:48 AM EDT (#220295) #

he'd rather not juggle the rest of the lineup (we saw Joe Maddon doing the same thing with his cleanup hitter this weekend)

For good or for bad, I'd suggest that Maddon is not locked in to a specific lineup. At all. He has players moving every which way. He had Jaso leading off for a while. He's had Upton near the top and near the bottom. Other than Longoria and Pena, I'm not sure who has a specific lineup spot for him. I'd argue that Maddon probably dropped Johnson into the 4-hole entirely by design, not as a simple convenience.

Magpie - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 10:52 AM EDT (#220296) #
i think they bounce back offensively next year

I'm not sure "bounce back" is the operative phrase. The 2010 Mariners have the worst offense in baseball, by a mile. By several miles, in fact. But it's not like they've fallen from a lofty height - the 2009 Mariners had the 28th best offense in baseball. Last year's team was to outscore, and just barely at that, two NL teams - the always pathetic Pirates and the San Diego Padres (who play half their games in the greatest pitcher's park in major league history.) So if the Mariners bounce back to that, it's probably not going to do them a lot of good.
Mike Green - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 10:56 AM EDT (#220297) #
But I can absolutely guarantee that if we were paying as close attention to Joe Girardi or Terry Francona or Joe Maddon, we'd be hearing the exact same thing

Agreed.  There are a few managers, Earl Weaver, Billy Martin, Whitey Herzog, whose in-game decisions very rarely made me shake my head.  It's funny because all three managed when I was at an age of more intense criticism of the Man...I wonder who is the best in-game tactician right now. 
Mick Doherty - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 10:59 AM EDT (#220298) #

John Gibbons?

;-)

Mick Doherty - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 10:59 AM EDT (#220299) #

John Gibbons?

;-)

Nigel - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 11:04 AM EDT (#220300) #
Living on the West Coast and seeing a number of Ms games this year and last my view is that if you like Cito, you would probably like Wak and vice versa.  Wak has always given off the same appearance of being an old school gentleman and wanting to treat the players like men.  However, he has had his player run ins (just like Cito) - who knows where blame lies for these incidents?  Like Cito, Wak loves set line ups (see: J. Lopez clean up hitter) and defined bull pen roles and is stubborn to change usage patters (for better or for worse).  He has shown a love affair for sacrifice bunting that drives Ms fans crazy but with that offense who knows if that's a belief system or desperation.  In general, I would have described (like Cito) his in-game managing style as average to below average - but while this makes me scratch my head once in a while, I find it hard to get too worked up about these shortcomings in managers.  I would have guessed that he was a good leader of men but this year suggests possibly otherwise. Prior to this year, I would have said that you could do much worse than Wak, but this year's Ms team has totally broken down on every level possible (not just in the obvious way that they are a terrible team - but their effort and attitude are even worse) and many questions need to be answered about why.
Magpie - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 11:26 AM EDT (#220301) #
I'd suggest that Maddon is not locked in to a specific lineup. At all. He has players moving every which way.

It's always hard to know what a manager you don't follow all that closely is doing, and why. And it's always hard to draw a distinction between juggling the lineup and making a change. I think we would all agree that Gaston does not juggle - he makes more or less permanent changes (dropping Wells and Rios last year, Hill and Lind this year, moving Overbay and Bautista around until he located their sweet spot.)

As for Maddon this year, I am looking over his batting orders. He definitely began the year with a set lineup from 1-7, with his catcher and second baseman swapping the final two spots in the order, depending on who was playing that day. For the first two months of the season, his lineup is generally Bartlett ss, Crawford, lf, Zobrist, rf, Longoria, 3b, Pena, rf, Upton cf, Burrel dh and the final two guys.

Then, at the end of May, he loses his leadoff hitter as Bartlett goes on the DL. Brignac fills in at short, but he's not anointed the new leadoff hitter. Maddon starts experimenting at the top of the order - at leadoff he tries Zobrist, Upton, Jaso, back to Upton, back to Jaso - and at the same time he moves Longoria-Pena from 4-5 in the order to 3-4 (Zobrist hits 5th when he's not leading off.)

Bartlett returns, but he's been having a lousy year with the bat anyway, so he goes to the bottom of the order, hitting 8th or 9th. Maddon settles on Zobrist as his main leadoff hitter - although Upton and Jaso both occasionally take a turn there... Yesterday Carl Crawford, who had hit 2nd in every game he had played, batted third. I don't know what to make of it all - but it looks to me like he's doing a fair bit of experimenting, like he's looking for something and hasn't found it. The injuries and disappointing performances have forced things also. Of course, that's happened here too, but to a lesser degree. Gaston had to, eventually, drop his two big disappointments (Hill and Lind) in the order - and it took him a while to settle on the most productive spots for Bautista and Overbay.
Magpie - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 11:30 AM EDT (#220302) #
There are a few managers, Earl Weaver, Billy Martin, Whitey Herzog

Ah, you never saw Whitey use five relievers in two innings, did you? Until he found the guy who didn't have his stuff that day....
92-93 - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 11:33 AM EDT (#220303) #

I do think that the Arnsberg-Gaston partnership did not work as well as the Walton-Gaston partnership is working.   I suspect that the stress of the difficult partnership last year did not help Gaston's frame of mind and contributed to some of the unfortunate events. 

Amazing. Even when Clarence is the cause of a near-mutiny in the clubhouse it's somehow not his fault and we have to give him the benefit of the doubt because a pitching coach most thought was a miracle worker may have been causing Clarence stress. Starting Dewayne Wise in LF this weekend while Snider & Lewis rode pine was a clear indication of the problem with Clarence as manager.

92-93 - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 11:38 AM EDT (#220304) #

and it took him a while to settle on the most productive spots for Bautista and Overbay.

I love the implication that Overbay is being productive because he's hitting 7th, as opposed to him being productive because he has been every single year of his MLB career and just got off to a slow start. Lyle has been the team's 2nd best hitter for 2.5 months now and shouldn't be at the bottom of the order.

92-93 - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 11:39 AM EDT (#220305) #
And count me squarely in the "Bring Back Gibby!" camp. Super tactician.
Magpie - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 11:50 AM EDT (#220308) #
a near-mutiny in the clubhouse

There are actually some things in common between the two situations (the 2009 Blue Jays, the 2010 Mariners) - in each case, the problems began when a veteran player, highly respected by his teammates was - well, perceived as being thrown under the bus by the manager.

Wakamatsu lost his clubhouse, Gaston quite obviously has been able to keep his (or get it back, or whatever.) I think the front office, and the support given to the manager, is the major difference in the two situations. Wakamatsu was hung out to dry - by his players, and by his GM.

To be clear - I absolutely don't think Overbay has been productive because he's hitting seventh, just since he's been hitting seventh. I myself think he's best suited to hitting second, but a:) there is no way Cito Gaston would have someone as slow as Overbay hit second, and b:) what then do you do with Lewis/Escobar? Lead off Escobar, hit Lewis ninth? Could try that, I guess.
Mike Green - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 11:50 AM EDT (#220309) #
I remember 1989, and 1992-93 and 1994-97, as well as Gaston's more recent ups and downs from a "handler of men" perspective. In my view, he has overall done better than most in this department.

The partnership between a pitching coach and a manager bears some resemblance to a marriage.  One can say that it did not work out without necessarily blaming either party.  Arnsberg might have some significant technical chops, but may not have the deftest touch (knowing when to push and when to step back). 

Magpie - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 11:54 AM EDT (#220311) #
Super tactician.

Gibbons? I liked Gibbons, and I especially thought he did a good job running a bullpen. As an offensive tactician, I'm not sold - I'd sure want to know why his teams kept hitting into a zillion double plays. But I generally think that a manger's tactical skills are a very minor part of what he brings to the team anyway. I'd like to see him get another shot somewhere.
Magpie - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 12:03 PM EDT (#220314) #
Gibbons was much more active tactically than most modern managers - he really liked to use pinch hitters, and he also liked to hand out intentional walks. Gaston doesn't like doing either of these things. I would simply submit that active is not always better.
92-93 - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 12:11 PM EDT (#220316) #

You need to be on base to hit into double plays, so Cito's team can avoid them despite the fact he doesn't steal or hit-n-run much. The team's GIDP totals correlated well with their team OBPs under Gibbons - in 2005 & 2006 they hit into a lot of them because they were 4th in OBP too. In 2007 their OBP was terrible so they were at the bottom of the league in GIDP.

John Northey - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 12:16 PM EDT (#220317) #
Who are the guys currently viewed as 'best managers not managing'? I remember the days when Tim Johnson was one of those, Willie Randolph, Joe Girardi, ...

Checking B-R for recently removed guys with good w/l records...
Willie Randolph win%=544 but the team improved a lot when Jerry Manuel took over before dropping sub-500 for the 2 years since. One playoff appearance in 3 1/2 years.
Grady Little win%=552 3 times in 2nd place, made playoffs twice (missed with 93 wins). Lasted only 2 seasons per team (Red Sox & Dodgers). Sox won series year after he was let go.
Bob Brenly win%=536, playoffs first 2 years (WS title) then above 500, then last place and horrid (replacement did worse, 2 more years sub-500). First drop off was seeing offense go awol (Hillenbrand & Overbay were there) with great pitching (122 team ERA+). Next year Hilly was regular at 1B, and 12 different guys started a game with ERA+ dropping to 93 (!).
Jimy Williams win%=535, but we all know about him and I can't imagine anyone wants him back.
Larry Dierker win%=556, let go after 5 out of 6 years in first place, Houston hasn't won their division since but did make playoffs under Gardner. Couldn't get out of first round of playoffs for whatever reason.

If Dierker is interested I'd certainly look at hiring him. Houston spent 10 years before him without winning their division, and 9 since.
Magpie - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 12:38 PM EDT (#220319) #
Actually, Gibbons' Jays were pretty good at avoiding the DP in his first full season. In 2005, the team was about average at getting people on base but hit into notably fewer DPs than the other teams.

The GDPs became a big problem in 2006 - true, they did have a lot of people on base, but they also led the league in extra-base hits, something which should actually reduce the DPs. They came quite close to leading the league (short by 4) - they hit into many more double plays than the Yankees and Red Sox, despite not having anywhere near as many base-runners.

They did solve the GDP problem in 2007, as you noted, by not having anyone on base.

But then in 2008, the GDPs just went insane - they throttled the team's offense in the cradle, and ultimately had a lot to do with costing the manager his job. (They hit into 150 DPs altogether - that was an unbelievable 84 GDPs in the 74 games Gibbons managed, and 66 GDPs in the final 88 games.)
Magpie - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 12:47 PM EDT (#220320) #
Bob Brenly was easily the worst tactical manager I have ever seen, by a comfortable margin. He's got the World Series ring to prove it.

Larry Dierker just didn't fit in Houston - they kept winning 90 games when he was in charge. That's simply not the Astro way, which is to go 81-81. Unless they go 82-80. Or 80-82.
John Northey - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 01:02 PM EDT (#220321) #
It is funny sometimes as to who gets multiple chances and who doesn't. A lot of baseball politics obviously. I should've added Bobby Valentine who is 510 win% and has had a fair number of good and bad years plus great success in Japan.
Magpie - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 01:03 PM EDT (#220322) #
Who are the guys currently viewed as 'best managers not managing'? I remember the days when Tim Johnson was one of those...

You young guys may have trouble believing this, but Tim Johnson seemed like a great idea at the time. He'd managed successfully in the minors (a good indicator) and he'd spent time in a major league dugout (which I think is absolutely essential). He was from outside the organization, so he didn't have any existing relationships to redefine. That's always the problem with promoting the third base coach, and it's the biggest strike against Butterfield. (It could very easily be Jimy Williams Mark Two.)

Gaston himself, of course, was a coach on the team when he originally got the job. The bad experience with Williams was the main reason Gillick didn't want to repeat the same thing with another one of the coaches - he spent two weeks trying to prise Lou Piniella away from the Yankees. And Gaston had never managed anywhere, ever. The secret of his success, that first year anyway, was simply figuring out what Jimy Williams would do - and then doing the exact opposite. I'm not kidding about this.
Timbuck2 - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 01:13 PM EDT (#220325) #
I think 2008's first half DP fiasco was all the fault of the newly hired hitting coach, Mr Gary Denbo.  I recall Matt Stairs complaining that year about how he was coaching the team on hitting - trying to hit everything the other way, not pulling the ball at all.  I also remember seeing a game where Stairs was talking hitting with Rios and you could clearly see the message he was trying to get through - keep your eye on the ball.

Of course that was the year the Denbo and Gibbons got fired after what seemed like a lot of knee-jerk reactions by a management team that was obviously managing scared.  Then the call went out that they needed a hero -

Hi Ho Cito!

In all honesty I don't think that Cito has done a bad job this year.  Two years ago he came in out of the blue to try and right the ship with almost no real knowledge of the players or what they were capable of.  He was an old school manager from another time with what appears to be an amazing scouts eye, and he's spent the last two years not only learning the players but learning how to deal with the wealth of information that was probably not all available when he managed last.  Ironically, I think that the clubhouse revolt that happened last year was the best thing that could have happened to him.  He's always regarded himself as a players coach and suddenly he had a room full of guys all talking about his apparently poor managerial decisions (at least compared to Gibby's) behind his back.  Alex (bless him!) took it upon himself to investigate the matter thoroughly and once he had all the info, brought it to Cito and together they promised the players that things would be better.  And so far this year things seem to have been much better.  The players n general seem to be much happier and more relaxed and are performing accordingly

Every manager has his quirks.  The grass will forever be greener on the other side.  We need to appreciate what we have without longing for what we don't have.  I believe the intangibles that Cito brings to the clubhouse far outweighs his penchant for following his gut instincts during game time.

Sorry Will and 92-93, but I hope that they bring him back for a few more years to come
92-93 - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 02:02 PM EDT (#220328) #
I've actually been rather pleased with Clarence's managing this year, so not sure why you're apologizing to me. Pointing out his glaring mistakes (like giving Wise a start while the team's future, Snider, sits on the bench) doesn't mean I don't appreciate what's happening on the field. I've been pleasantly surprised with Clarence's handling of the pitching staff, and that actually includes the bullpen, despite his crush on Brian Tallet leading to a couple of ill-timed usages. If the Blue Jays don't bring out the pocketbooks and spend this winter on Cliff Lee and/or Carl Crawford I wouldn't have much of an issue with him returning - he's leading a non-contender in mostly the right direction. Until Rogers makes the commitment to winning Clarence seems as good a choice as any to tide us over.
Jonny German - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 02:32 PM EDT (#220332) #

I liked Gibbons, and I especially thought he did a good job running a bullpen.

My memory had Gibbons being a good bullpen manager at first but later seasons making it look like the early success was just luck. I just went through his teams on BB-Ref and it appears that my impression at the time was out to lunch. All of his full season teams and his partial season in 2008 had lots of good reliever performances, and often from unlikely sources - Brian Tallet, Jeremy Accardo, Brian Wolfe, Casey Janssen, Jesse Carlson.

Mylegacy - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 02:48 PM EDT (#220333) #
It must be 'cause I'm so old - but - I think I understand - and mostly agree - with Cito's approach to coaching.

Basically, you have the players you have - period. Guys over your head will listen to you tell them you need two more Willy Mays' but don't expect them to turn up. Sample size - an everyday player is going to get about 600+ at bats per year. You can't over react by what happens in 100 of those - good or bad. Penduleum's  swing. The year is a 162 game - mind numbing, soul wrenching, physically demanding marathon. Wise plays one game Snider sits - fans explode - I groan.

Overbay - seriously - can Lind even play first anywhere near as well as Lyle? How many missed balls do you think our exceptional defense can afford, how many games lost can we afford before we admit - oops - Lyle ain't such an anchor after all. I don't know those answers - Cito doesn't know those answers. Apparently, Cito would rather we found out in Spring Training next year than in mid-season this year.

On the pitching side - Cito is trying to make men of our boys. Letting them learn on the job - he really has no choice - he's showing them his kind, solid confidence and it seems to be rubbing off on them. His letting Morrow finish up that game was simple - you've had a wonderful game. Now man up. You've one more guy to get - show what you're made of - get the bastard. And Morrow did. Later, some day when he wins a Cy Young he'll look back at Cito forcing him to man up and he'll know that was the second he became more than just a gifted pitcher - but a true professional.

Cito trusts what he's seen over time - he KNOWS JP isn't gonna hit no 2 home runs every game - he loves it - but it's not going to make him put JP in the 4 hole tomorrow and screw with letting the kid finish his development. Cito - I don't agree with lots you do - but I suspect - when I disagree - more often than not I'm the one who's wrong.

85bluejay - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 03:05 PM EDT (#220334) #

I certainly hope the Jays don't open their pocketbooks on Cliff Lee and/or Carl Crawford - I would be disappointed

because the back end of those 6/7 yr. contracts are going to be a drag on the team. I prefer they open their

pocketbooks on the June draft picks and IFA market  and keep doing so for the long haul. Use players for 5/6

yrs and then say goodbye in a trade or draft picks with very few exceptions. I like the Aaron Hill type contracts,

even if his doesn't work out well.

 

sam - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 03:09 PM EDT (#220335) #
I think it's fair to say Rogers have made a "committment to winning."  Vernon was signed to a monster contract, AJ, BJ, Halladay re-upped.  They've resigned all of our players who management have asked to be resigned?  For the most part they've delineated to the baseball people, they seem to now back AA and his strategy of spending heavily on amatuer players.  I don't know what more you expect from them?  Nobody in their right mind expects them to spend like the Yankees or Red Sox and for them to have done that at any point in the last three or four years would have been foolish.  You could even argue they tried doing that one winter and it back-fired.  I don't know what then constitutes a "committment to winning?"  I guess taking on payroll at the trade deadline is the only thing they haven't done?  Hopefully, in a couple years when all the pieces are assembled and they need to be resigned then I guess we'll see whether they're truly "committed" or when we need that extra piece, but right now I think they've been pretty fair owners. 
Kasi - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 03:10 PM EDT (#220336) #
I doubt many would disagree with not having JPA as catcher on Sunday, especially given the results. But even before that we know Molina is Morrow's personal catcher. Getting him in there at DH is tough given Lind and others fighting for that spot.

However their handling of Snider is baffling. Since he's come back he has by far the most games off. EE is getting more regular playing time then he is. In the 9 games since he's come back to the team, he's been sat 4 times. In two of them he came in late in the game, once as a PH and once as a replacement after Wells got hurt. So he's playing barely 50% of the time (5/9). EE has been played 8/9, Fred Lewis 5/9 and Bautista 9/9. And in that time period Snider has looked damn good, with a strong OPS. Not to mention them having him hit leadoff. If EE is going to be resigned at 3B next year then sure, But if AA has no plan on resigning him Snider must get at bats before EE does. I am sick of Cito saying he needs to get big contracts for outgoing players as reason to give them playing time.

If Cito comes back next year they need to take his toys away. No more MacDonald (sadly won't really happen since he has an odd 2 year deal), no Tallet, no Millar type players,  no "veteran" players with no business being on this team taking away chances from our future players. Our bench people should be young guys, we have enough veterans already in our lineup. So I'd like to see people like Mastriano, Emaus and others be our utility guys if needed.

sam - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 03:13 PM EDT (#220338) #
I agree with 85 bluejay.  It would not be smart and I don't think signing those two would put the Jays over the hump
Mike Green - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 03:16 PM EDT (#220340) #
Sam, ownership in my view failed to spend early last year, when it mattered.  The club apparently offered Burnett a lot of money, and when he moved on and the club started the year very hot, they did not spend any of the money that was earmarked for him on obviously needed support.

In fairness, the organization has spent some considerable additional money on the minor league system since then.

Thomas - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 03:18 PM EDT (#220341) #
Wakamatsu lost his clubhouse, Gaston quite obviously has been able to keep his (or get it back, or whatever.) I think the front office, and the support given to the manager, is the major difference in the two situations. Wakamatsu was hung out to dry - by his players, and by his GM.

I think this is an interesting point, but I don't think the GM factor explains it entirely. All winter long we heard from every source but the organization itself how bad the rift in the clubhouse was. It seems every time I heard an offseason radio interview with Wilner, he was asked about the managing situation and would outright say - or strongly imply - that the dissension ran much deeper than what became public knowledge over the last week of the 2009 season. Now, it wasn't just Wilner, but he was perhaps most vocal in this opinion.

Now, I do think the GMs played a role in the differing fates of Gaston and Wakamatsu. Gaston was publicly supported and it was made clear he was returning for another season at the helm. While Jack Z didn't stand as firmly behind Wakamatsu, he did say, as of a week ago or so, something to the effect of Wakamatsu is the club's manager and will be going forward. While the GMs did not express the same degree of support for the managers, I don't find that a throughly convincing explanation.

Apparently, the discord was deep, running across different sections of the clubhouse and was unlike anything Wilner's ever seen before. Maybe this discontent with Cito's tactics still exists. Or the players have stifled their feelings either because of the team's performance or because they know Cito will retire at the end of the year. However, I think that if the issue was as severe as has been speculated, it would have boiled over again at some point during the season so far. And, as far as we can tell, it hasn't. Somehow, someway, Cito (perhaps with AA's assistance) has been able to assert some measure of control over the clubhouse and I think that's certainly contributed to the success of the team.

Kasi - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 03:28 PM EDT (#220343) #
To elaborate on one point I was making before, I think Cito's biggest issue as a manager is his love of the "veteran player". He will not give consistent playing time to young people unless given no other choice. I look around the majors this year and I see teams like Atlanta giving Heyward every chance he has to succeed, even if he struggles. Or how much trust they've put in young Prado. Or Tampa giving a ton of playing time to Jaso their new catcher. Or St. Louis going and trading Ludwick because they thought a guy like Jay could do as well. And over here Snider continues to get jerked around. Never knows when he is going to play, even what he hits well he sits regularly. One day bats 1th, another 7th, another 9th, etc. Constantly yanked and moved around. Do they just not care much about the guy, because since his rough April he has done nothing but rake at every chance he's been given. He should be an every day player, but instead he's a platoon guy getting the short end of the stick.
Thomas - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 03:34 PM EDT (#220345) #
I doubt many would disagree with not having JPA as catcher on Sunday, especially given the results. But even before that we know Molina is Morrow's personal catcher. Getting him in there at DH is tough given Lind and others fighting for that spot.

I think the bigger problem is that DHing JP leaves the team with no catcher on the bench. Agree with it or not, Cito is clearly uncomfortable with doing that. The rotation would be a second issue, but I think the primary reason that JP will not DH - until September anyway - is that Cito wouldn't want to be put in a situation where the team may have to lose the DH or catch McDonald.

If Cito comes back next year they need to take his toys away. No more MacDonald (sadly won't really happen since he has an odd 2 year deal), no Tallet, no Millar type players, no "veteran" players with no business being on this team taking away chances from our future players. Our bench people should be young guys, we have enough veterans already in our lineup. So I'd like to see people like Mastriano, Emaus and others be our utility guys if needed.

I think bringing back Tallet was a fine move this season, he just hasn't pitched well. While the team right now has a multitude of options at starter, this year could have turned out very differently. Marcum and Litsch were returning from surgery and Morrow was transitioning from the bullpen to a starting role. Mills was injured last year and Cecil and Rzepczynski came with all the usual question marks about consistency and adjustment for young pitchers. Don't forget, the team began the year with Dana Eveland and Tallet in the rotation. I supported bringing Tallet back and I think having a veteran arm you could use as a long man - which was also a good option given the young starting staff - or a starter, if necessary, was wise. It's just that Tallet has been hurt and not pitched particularly well when healthy. Now, this role may not make sense on next year's team, or it may make more sense to give it to Mills or Richmond or Shawn Hill or someone else, but the idea of bringing Tallet back, regardless of how Cito was inclined to use him, made sense.

Also, I have no idea what your issue with John McDonald is (aside from 2 games in left field). He's spent the entire year on the roster and hasn't accumulated 90 plate appearances. He's exactly what you want (or at least can reasonably expect) in an infield reserve: he can play all 3 non-1B infield positions competently, brings a good glove and accepts his role on the team.

sam - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 03:39 PM EDT (#220346) #

I don't think that's fair.  When you say spend money, at that point in the season you presumably mean trading away prospects for established players?  No?  Because there aren't free agents to spend money on at that point?  So do you think trading Travis Snider, Henderson Alvarez, and probably Brett Cecil or something like that for Cliff Lee would've demonstrated a committment by management and presumably push us over the top?  General Mangers don't build championships in May, by the time June rolled around it was clear the team was not going to challenge.  So what exactly are you saying? 

Anders - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 03:41 PM EDT (#220347) #

However their handling of Snider is baffling. Since he's come back he has by far the most games off. EE is getting more regular playing time then he is. In the 9 games since he's come back to the team, he's been sat 4 times. In two of them he came in late in the game, once as a PH and once as a replacement after Wells got hurt. So he's playing barely 50% of the time (5/9). EE has been played 8/9, Fred Lewis 5/9 and Bautista 9/9.

I agree that Snider should be playing almost all the time, he is one of their best hitters and I think on the verge of something big. With that being said, Bautista has been the team's best hitter by a mile (and one of the 10 best in the majors this year) and is red hot, so he isn't going to sit, and the only other third baseman on the roster is Johnny Mac... Bautista has played 3rd twice in the last two months and at this point it seems clear that they aren't going to move him there fulltime, at least for this season.

I think the issue is that the guys that are going to play LF, 1B, DH - Snider, Lewis, Overbay, Lind - are all lefthanded, and they all hit lefties much worse than righties so there is no natural platoon. If it were me I would start Snider against lefties and sit Lewis, and then rotate the 4 through the 3 positions against righties, but this is easier said than done.  

Oh and Dewayne Wise has 61 PA in exactly 2 calendar months with the team - of the 50 odd games he has started 11... it's more than ideal but given that Snider missed a bunch of time and I believe Lewis also missed a few, I really don't have a problem with this.

Kasi - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 03:45 PM EDT (#220349) #
Well it's good for us that the spots Mac fills is our team leaders/vets. Gonzalez wasn't going to lose much to MacDonald, and neither would Hill, both being veterans. My issue is more with yes the disastrous LF tryouts as well as doing baffling things like batting him second. MacDonald is a below average player and his glove other then at SS isn't that good anyway. There is no need for him to be on the team other then a morale/glue guy when we could get a guy just as good from the minors. I'm just glad that MacDonald has vets ahead of him at the position he plays, because if not I'd be mighty upset if he as well was taking at bats away from Snider.

Tallet has been a disaster. He had a few good starts last year, but we knew this guy wasn't the answer. He was a fill in like you said, but then he started pitching this season. And right now he is in the running for the worst pitcher in baseball this year. Going by WAR he surely is a candidate. I don't know why he hasn't gone the way of Eveland and been released. At least Eveland gave us 3-4 good starts this year, Tallet gave us like what one? We have people like Roenicke, Carllson and Accardo in the minors languishing away, and instead Tallet comes in and gets lit up constantly.

The handling of Snider as well as the constant references to "getting our outgoing players a big contract" are my biggest issues with him. Could you imagine the firestorm that would occur if Francona or Gerardi said they were playing a vet over a promising up and coming player because they wanted to get them a big contract elsewhere? They put winning first, and our lineup should be based on a mix of 1) getting the best lineup on the field 2) developing our young guys.

sam - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 03:48 PM EDT (#220350) #

Money lost on AJ spent elsewhere?  On who?  CC Sabathia?  Mark Texiara?  Frankie Rodriguez?  Do you think any of those would come to Toronto for more money than they received?  If I recall, CC signed with New York before AJ.  I guess you could say the Jays should've then made a run at Derek Lowe or Ryan Dempster, but Dempster didn't want to leave and he's had significant injury issues and I don't see Derek Lowe coming to the Jays once AJ left.  In fact I don't see any of these players coming to the Jays once AJ leaves. 

Kasi - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 03:59 PM EDT (#220351) #
Bautista yes has been our best hitter, but he should get about a day off every 2 weeks. He's not getting any days off, which I don't think is wise. AA recently has been interviewed and said he's fine with Bautista playing third. I do think that EE is better at defense at third then Bautista, but EE should not be an every day player right now, especially in place of Snider. Bautista getting 1 day off out of 10-13 would help keep him fresher as well as help give a bit more playtime to Snider. I also don't want to be platooning Snider at this point in his career. He needs to face pitchers from both sides.

We do have too many players right now on the team and something needs to be done to lighten the load of full time players. I'm curious what is going to happen next year, especially given the talk lately about bringing Overbay back. We still don't know a thing about what they plan to do with Encarnacion.

Mike Green - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 04:01 PM EDT (#220352) #
Sam, they didn't need Cliff Lee.  They needed a starter and a reliever of more pedestrian abilities, and it could be had essentially for $ rather than prospects in early June.
John Northey - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 04:10 PM EDT (#220353) #
Looking at the roster and usage ...
Snider, despite missing a VERY large part of the season has more PA than both Molina & McDonald who have been here all year.

PA leaders in order...
400+: Bautsita, Wells, Lind, Overbay, Hill
300-399: Lewis, Gonzalez, Buck
200-299: Encarnacion
100-199: Snider, Molina
50-99: Escobar, McDonald, Wise, McCoy
Sub 50: Ruiz, Hoffpauir, Reed, Green, JPA

Add Gonzo & Escobar together and you get 416 PA - between Hill & Overbay.

Snider has lost a lot of PA's, especially lately. Since he returned July 30th he has had 26 PA going 304/385/522. He started 5 games, came in late to 3 (his first 2 back and the last game), and missed 1. That actually makes more sense than I expected. His first couple of games he had to get back into the routine of being in the majors, then Cito did his old one game off before an off-day to maximize rest. The game he fully missed was against a guy who is tough on the Jays historically.

Y'know, Snider has played more than I thought since he got back. His off-day and 2 partial games make a lot of sense if you think about it.

As to the rest of the lineup, I'm VERY glad that McDonald has so few PA and will most likely stay under 100 for the season - that is making the best use of him (pinch run, defensive replacement). Giving Overbay tons of playing time also makes sense as he is a free agent and needs every PA possible to qualify for a draft pick for the Jays. Given this is a development year and no one is really ready for his slot (we thought Wallace might be, but he's gone now) it just makes sense to try to gain that pick. Really, looking at it I'd have trouble complaining at this point as the low PA are more due to injuries (Snider, Encarnacion) or just not being a good hitter (Molina, McDonald) or not being here (Escobar).
92-93 - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 04:12 PM EDT (#220355) #

I doubt many would disagree with not having JPA as catcher on Sunday, especially given the results. But even before that we know Molina is Morrow's personal catcher.

With Morrow pitching Sunday and Monday as an off day, there was no reason Arencibia couldn't have caught Friday night and Saturday afternoon. There's nothing in the rule books against a catcher playing the day game after a night game, especially with 2 days of rest right after.

I think it's fair to say Rogers have made a "committment to winning."  Vernon was signed to a monster contract, AJ, BJ, Halladay re-upped. Nobody in their right mind expects them to spend like the Yankees or Red Sox and for them to have done that at any point in the last three or four years would have been foolish.

Those things all happened in 2006, and we're at least 3.5+ seasons from each of them. I'd like to think I'm in my right mind and I definitely expect them to spend like the Red Sox because there's no reason why they can't. The GTA is significantly larger than the GBA, and the Red Sox have been getting what they pay for in terms of success. The Blue Jays can't sit back and twiddle their thumbs claiming poor attendance is the reason for slashed payrolls - you need to spend first and win and then the crowds come, not the other way around. There's no excuse for the Blue Jays cutting their on-field opening day payroll nearly 40% over the last 2 years - when you consider inflation and the exchange rate Rogers is spending CONSIDERABLY less this year on the team than they did in 2006.

John Northey - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 04:18 PM EDT (#220357) #
Why do so many want EE gone? He currently is sitting at 249/311/472 for an OPS+ of 112 - his highest ever. Since he came back from AAA he has hit 303/327/477. That is solid production from 3B.

Yes, his defense is poor but this year his UZR/150 is at -4.3 which is a drastic improvement from his -11.8 to -16.4 from 2006-2009. It seems Butterfield has had an effect on him. According to FanGraphs he has been worth about $4.6 million so far vs his salary of $4.75 thus he has been worth what he is paid (most likely) despite the earlier issues. This is a guy in his prime who has shown he can hit but needs to be watched closely and maybe that wake up call has done the trick.
MatO - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 04:27 PM EDT (#220358) #
I'm not a fan of the theory that players can just turn it on in their FA year.  However, I think I'd take the chance on a motivated EE in 2011.  The stint in AAA seems to have gotten his attention.
Kasi - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 04:34 PM EDT (#220359) #
Snider got lots of early season at bats because EE was injured. This allowed him and Lewis to both play in the OF and Bautista played third a lot. Now with EE back it is crowding both Snider and Lewis out. I think EE does have value and should be played (and even kept given the options) but that means Lewis needs to go, or be the 4th OF. Which is tough because he has been quite good this year. It will be interesting to look back in lets say 2 weeks and see what Snider and Lewis are at for playing time. Maybe those 2 games at the start were really just because he got called up and he will be a 5+ games a week guy. But we'll have to see how it is going forward. I'm guessing Snider at most will be getting 4, which isn't enough for him.
Magpie - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 04:34 PM EDT (#220360) #
Our bench people should be young guys, we have enough veterans already in our lineup.

Disagree with that. I'm defnitely with Gaston on this subject - he likes veterans on his bench precisely because he doesn't plan on using them very often. He thinks, and so do I, that young players need to play. If they're not quite ready to be in the lineup, it's better for everyone if they're playing in the minors. The role of sitting around, watching, and being ready every couple of weeks is not a role for a young player - it's a job for the McDonalds and Wises of this world. You give them a start every couple of weeks to keep them sharp, and to reward them for being good citizens, and accepting the role.
92-93 - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 04:37 PM EDT (#220361) #
Nobody in this thread wanted him gone, we just don't like the idea that our most prized offensive prospect is losing development ABs effectively to him. And that game against Cleveland immediately springs to mind as an example of the poor ABs he's been having in big spots since the break - down 1 in the 9th CLE IBBed Overbay to load the bases with one out for Encarnacion, and he promptly struck out. He's 0/6 with 3 Ks and 2 GIDPs with a runner on 3rd and less than 2 outs since the ASG. It will be very interesting to see how AA handles 3B/EE over the winter.
Magpie - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 04:40 PM EDT (#220362) #
There's nothing in the rule books against a catcher playing the day game after a night game

There is something to that effect in Gaston's personal rule book, though. He just ain't gonna do it. If Morrow's turn had fallen on Saturday, I'm sure Arencibia would have played Friday and Sunday; if Morrow's turn had fallen on Friday, I think he probably would have played Saturday and Sunday. It's just the way things fell out. Although, my gosh - is it really that big a deal?
sam - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 04:42 PM EDT (#220363) #

I don't have the numbers to back this up, but to compare our financial and geographic situation with the Red Sox seems absurd.  The Red Sox sell out every game at pretty expensive ticket prices, the Jays don't come close to their attendance.  The Red Sox are a New England brand so forget about Greater Boston, they're a staple in American society. 

I agree with cutting payroll, the team was not competing, nor were they close to competing and there was no reason to have players making the money they on that team.  Then again, in a couple years if the team is getting close then it's time to open the bank. 

Kasi - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 04:42 PM EDT (#220364) #
There is a difference between prospects and younger players who might never top out as anything more then 4th OF/5th IF types, or platoon players. Prospects yes need to be given as much playing time as they can to develop. If the Jays don't think Emaus fits in as the 3B of the future or as a useful trade chip, then I'd like him to be in the majors as our reserve infielder given his versatility and OBP skills. Same with Mastroainni. Remember Cito is the guy who had Millar batting cleanup for us last year. Even though he couldn't hit a lick.

But going by the logic of getting the prospects as much time to develop as they can, I see no point in having JPA up here in September. He'd probably get more use staying in AAA til the season ends. And if they don't plan on giving Snider more then 3-4 days a week, then I'd drop him down too. Although he has nothing left to prove in the minors, and really should be our everyday left fielder now. I just don't trust Cito to put the best lineup out there if he has to choose between his vets and the young guys.

Magpie - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 04:50 PM EDT (#220365) #
Remember Cito is the guy who had Millar batting cleanup for us last year.

To which I say, as I said somewhere up the page... that never before in the history of human conflict has so much been made by so many over... so few. 43 at bats.
Kasi - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 04:58 PM EDT (#220367) #
It's not an isolated incident though Magpie. I can list a few here:

1) Things like MacDonald hitting 2nd or Millar 4th.
2) Constant overuse of people like Tallet and refusal for weeks to give Purcey any high leverage situations.
3) His choice to keep his vets at the same place in the lineup but yank the young guys all over the place.
4) His constant talk in press conferences about how he has to play his vets in order to get them their next big contract.

It all leads to a guy who isn't interested in putting the best possible lineup in the field. He clearly favors vets more and feels that young guys have to earn their way into playing time. Which is at odds with many other teams out there that when a young player shines they let him play, even full time at a very young age. The only way that the young player gets the full time job is if the guy in front of him leaves or gets injured. So if AA wants to keep Cito around, he needs to take away any vets who Cito will allow to steal Snider's development time. I don't agree with Keith Law about a lot of things, but he said something to the effect of "If they don't let Snider play every day then they're not serious about developing him". And clearly up to this point they're not.

TamRa - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 05:03 PM EDT (#220369) #
re Bobby V:

If I'm reaching in the "old guys" bucket for a manager, I'll take Davy Johnson thank you.



Magpie - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 05:10 PM EDT (#220373) #
I see no point in having JPA up here in September.

Well, Las Vegas ends its season on September 6. Arencibia may even stay there through the end. But by September 7, he ought to be in Toronto, surely. Unless he has a cruise planned or something...

The thing about anointing someone like Emaus as your utility infielder (in his particular case, I'd note that he doesn't appear to have played a single game at shortstop, ever, which is kind of a job requirement.) But more to the point - you may think you know how your young players will develop, you may think you know what their ceiling is. You may have a very good idea indeed. But you don't actually know, and it's wise to always remember that. And so you still have to let the kids play the game and find their level, and hit their ceilings, rather than expect them to fit smoothly into what you assume is their inevitable professional destiny.

It's exactly when you think you have something figured out that this game likes to kick you in the behind, and laugh in your face.
Kasi - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 05:18 PM EDT (#220378) #
Well that's true enough. What Baustista has done this year is proof of that if nothing else.

I would like it for someone like Emaus or Mastro to break out, but given the makeup and management of this team I doubt they'll be given a chance. I think it was Lott who said it, but I don't think AA and scouts are really high on either of the two players.

As for Snider, well tonight he is back down to 9th. I was hoping that if Cito was willing to let him hit leadoff when Lewis was out that he could hit cleanup with Wells out. Instead he is hitting 9th behind JPA. I can see some point to synergy with the top of the lineup, but still 9th is the worst place to hit and will get him the fewest plate appearances. I'd like to trust what you said Magpie in that players will be allowed to hit and find their ceilings and be rewarded for it. But I find it far too likely that a veteran player will prevent most of that from happening as long as Cito is around.



mathesond - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 05:22 PM EDT (#220380) #
He's 0/6 with 3 Ks and 2 GIDPs with a runner on 3rd and less than 2 outs since the ASG

Well, that's enough of a sample size for me. I'm sold!
Magpie - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 05:27 PM EDT (#220384) #
1) Things like MacDonald hitting 2nd or Millar 4th.
2) Constant overuse of people like Tallet and refusal for weeks to give Purcey any high leverage situations.
3) His choice to keep his vets at the same place in the lineup but yank the young guys all over the place.
4) His constant talk in press conferences about how he has to play his vets in order to get them their next big contract.


1) We've been over this time and time again. When Gaston is using a reserve, he bats the reserve in the same batting order position as the regular he's replacing rather than juggle his lineup. Whether this is a good idea or a bad idea, nobody knows. Nobody knows.

2) I don't know who people like Tallet are, but Tallet certainly hasn't been overused. He's made 15 relief appearances in two months. As for Purcey, I kind of agree - but Gaston will go to Scott Downs in a game situation before he goes to Purcey, and it's hard to hold that against him.

3) The only guy he's left alone this year is Wells. And Fred Lewis, I suppose. Overbay, who I think you would regard as a veteran has moved  around in the order. Bautista went from leadoff to bottom third of the order to the three spot. Gonzalez, while he was here, moved around plenty. Hill and Lind, who aren't exactly kids, were treated exactly the same way Wells and Rios were last season. They didn't produce and they got moved down in the lineup. So I don't know what you're talking about. Gaston doesn't juggle from day to day - he does make changes.

4) Who the hell cares what he says to the press. He's just feeding the beast, it's the daily gauntlet, just sound and fury. Who cares what he tells them?
Kasi - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 05:41 PM EDT (#220388) #
1) No he doesn't. Snider is replacing Wells, and he isn't batting 4th. He is batting 9th, leaving Hill as our cleanup hitter today.
2) Downs of course should be our high leverage guy, but Purcey should have been in for those 5th/6th inning roles lately when Tallet had to come in for a starter who was leaving batters on/struggling.
3) He keeps his vets in the same spot, but yeah he will after a month or more of struggling move them to a different spot. Snider however is being yanked all over the lineup.
4) I do, because I believe that speaks to how he makes managerial decisions. Part of his thought process with making lineups is getting vets who are leaving their money. I find this unacceptable and I think if you asked a Yankee fan if they would find it acceptable if Girardi said something similar, they would agree.

The point comes down to though is that Cito doesn't like young guys. He prefers to not play them given the chance. His interviews say this, his lineups say this, the way he handles relievers/players say this. Maybe it is a holdover from his playing days experiences, but I'm 100% certain that Cito will never let a rookie get a full time job if given any other choice.

Hodgie - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 05:50 PM EDT (#220391) #

"The point comes down to though is that Cito doesn't like young guys. He prefers to not play them given the chance. His interviews say this, his lineups say this, the way he handles relievers/players say this. Maybe it is a holdover from his playing days experiences, but I'm 100% certain that Cito will never let a rookie get a full time job if given any other choice."

And another horse is beaten to death with CDS.....

Kasi - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 05:55 PM EDT (#220394) #
True it probably doesn't need to be said anymore. I think everyone has their opinion and isn't changing it. It just frustrates me so when I watch other teams give their young players a chance to play every day.
Magpie - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 06:43 PM EDT (#220407) #
I'm 100% certain that Cito will never let a rookie get a full time job if given any other choice.

Then you're 100 percent wrong. What an utterly astonishing thing to say. It would be extremely difficult to be more wrong about the man's career as a major league manager.
Kasi - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 10:29 PM EDT (#220426) #
I'm not as familiar with Cito's managerial decisions back in the 90s, since I wasn't following baseball much then. But the last 2 years I've been following the sport more shows a guy who doesn't like to use his young players. I've seen consistent behavior by him in the usage of starting pitchers, relievers and hitters that show he favors veterans. Could you give me some examples off the current roster?
China fan - Tuesday, August 10 2010 @ 11:47 PM EDT (#220432) #
Snider basically had a full-time job before he was injured this season.  That's just the first obvious example that occurs off the top of my head.   Gaston was happy to give Snider a full-time job when he was hitting well.  There's absolutely nothing to suggest that "Gaston doesn't like young players."  He gives them chances and lets them win a full-time job when their performance warrants it.

Kasi, I think you'd be more persuasive if you were slightly more nuanced in your comments.  The sweeping generalizations just won't work.  Gaston is not "constantly" talking about "getting money" for departing veterans.  He made a couple of brief references to the pending free agency of a couple players, and it wasn't even clear what he meant -- he may have just been mentioning Overbay's pending free-agent status as one of many factors in his decisions about Overbay, who in fact has justified Gaston's confidence in him in the past couple of months. Gaston has NEVER said that he would sacrifice the team's winning chances in order to benefit a departing veteran -- and there is absolutely no evidence that he has done this.  As for Purcey and Tallet -- again some nuance would be helpful in your comments.  Purcey has never been a reliever until this season, and he is just learning the job now.  Tallet is a veteran who is pretty good at getting lefties out.  There was nothing sinister or conspiratorial in Gaston's preference for Tallet in those situations.  As Purcey got more accustomed to the major-league bullpen job, Gaston has given him more high-leverage chances.  Feel free to quibble with anything that Gaston does, but the sweeping attacks on Gaston are just not going to persuade anyone, especially when you provide so little evidence to support them.

Kasi - Wednesday, August 11 2010 @ 12:00 AM EDT (#220433) #
Snider was playing full time in my opinion because there wasn't any other options. EE was hurt and thus there was no competition for the job, since Bautista was at third.

He has talked about getting contracts for both Overbay and Encarnacion. Sorry but when a manager says in a post game interview that "we are putting the guy out there because we want him to get a better contract in the offseason" that offends me as a fan, especially when it ends up taking away development time from our young players.

I never said there was anything sinister or conspiratorial about what Cito does. I just echo what is said by a lot of people who follow the Jays. That Cito favors veterans. All over the majors I see young players come up from the minors and given every day jobs. (was watching the start of the Was/Fla game early tonight and Logan Morrison was hitting in the 2 hole) And those players aren't just constantly stuck in the bottom of the lineup. I don't see the same trust given to young players here.

I like a lot of things that Cito does. I like that he is patient with people. I like that he gives them a lot of chances to work through their stuff/issues. I like his idea of choosing a pitch to hit and going for it, given the composition of hitters on this team. I just have an issue with how he decides which players to be patient with that's all.
China fan - Wednesday, August 11 2010 @ 12:10 AM EDT (#220434) #
.....Sorry but when a manager says in a post game interview that "we are putting the guy out there because we want him to get a better contract in the offseason"

You are flat wrong.  He did not say that.  Go back and look at the original quote, and cite it accurately.  Don't put things into quotation marks if they are not verbatim.  You twisted his words and misquoted him to make the comment seem much stronger than what he actually said.  If you're going to make claims about what Gaston said, provide the exact words -- not your vague recollection of what you think he said.
China fan - Wednesday, August 11 2010 @ 12:16 AM EDT (#220436) #
....Snider was playing full time in my opinion because there wasn't any other options....

And now you're blatantly contradicting yourself.  First you claim that Gaston refused to play Snider.  Then you admit that he gave a full-time job to Snider before he was injured.  To justify your inconsistency, you claim "there wasn't any other options."  Well, that's not what you originally said.  And your new argument makes no sense anyway.  If you actually believe that Gaston favors veterans over rookies, then he always has the option of finding a veteran somewhere on the roster to put into the lineup ahead of a young player.  Encarnacion is not the only veteran in the Jays system.  Or are you saying that Gaston always discriminates against young players -- except when Encarnacion is injured? It's a bizarre claim to make.
Magpie - Wednesday, August 11 2010 @ 12:20 AM EDT (#220438) #
I just echo what is said by a lot of people who follow the Jays. That Cito favors veterans.

It's very true that people say that - but it's one of those things people say that flies directly in the face of the facts. These things happen, these narratives develop and take on a life of their own. But it would be like saying Tony LaRussa is reluctant to use LH relievers...
Magpie - Wednesday, August 11 2010 @ 12:24 AM EDT (#220440) #
Snider was playing full time in my opinion because there wasn't any other options.

There are always options - in this case, journeyman veterans like Jeremy Reed - and in view of the fact that Snider went approximately 0 for April, it wouldn't have been completely out of line for those guys to get a few more at bats. I assume we're all glad they didn't.
Alex Obal - Wednesday, August 11 2010 @ 12:28 AM EDT (#220442) #
Enough about our manager! Let's rip the other guy.

Francona owes Mike Lowell a delicious steak dinner, 'cause if Boston lost, he'd be getting savaged for leaving the lefty Doubront in to face Bautista and Hill in the 7th. A terrible, possibly self-indulgent, decision - he'd had at least Atchison throwing off and on for two innings, and letting a garden-variety hard throwing lefty face Bautista is essentially conceding at least a walk. I called Bautista's homer right before it happened. (Thomas will attest to this. I think. Snider's, too.)
Kasi - Wednesday, August 11 2010 @ 12:44 AM EDT (#220445) #
China Fan please calm down. What I am saying is that Snider hasn't been given the chance to play every day when put up against major league quality players. This addresses Magpie's point too, but there is a difference between someone like Reed and someone like EE. Part of it is the history of MLB level performance, part of it is the contracts they have. (which is why I ultimately think that Tallet is with the team and not Eveland, even though Dana pitched better) We're just talking past each other now and I don't think either one of us is going to convince anyone. I do wonder if you went back to the end of 2008 and said that Snider two years later would still not be a full time player would people be surprised.
Magpie - Wednesday, August 11 2010 @ 08:17 AM EDT (#220452) #
I ultimately think that Tallet is with the team and not Eveland, even though Dana pitched better

That's a very odd assessment. Their performance in the rotation this season:

Tallet       W  L    ERA    GS   IP     H   R  ER  HR  BB IBB  SO  HBP  WP  BF   WHIP   SO/9   SO/BB
as Starter   1  2    5.60   5   27.1 27  19  17   7  10   0  19    1  0  122  1.354   6.3   1.90

Eveland    W  L    ERA    GS   IP    H   R  ER  HR  BB IBB  SO  HBP  WP  BF   WHIP    SO/9  SO/BB
as Starter   3  5    6.34   10   49.2  63  38  35   4  29   1  21    3  4  235  1.852   3.8    0.7

But it's not even all that relevant, as neither guy figured in the team's long range plans (like into the second half of this season) as a starting pitcher. They dumped the guy who was younger and cheaper and they kept the better pitcher: who was also someone they were already familiar with, someone they already knew could pitch effectively out of the bullpen, and someone has simply been a far, far more effective pitcher at the major league level over several seasons.
Anders - Wednesday, August 11 2010 @ 10:14 AM EDT (#220466) #

At the risk of feeding the beast even more, I think it's important that we draw a distinction between moves that the GM has control over and the Manager has control over. I'm sure there is significant discussion and overlap, but for the most part the GM sets the roster and the Manager uses it. I don't get complaints about McDonald or Tallet playing; they are on the roster, they have to play occasionally. I personally make my assessment of the Manager over how well he utilizes his available resources, and on that count I am generally happy with Cito. I think that basically Cito makes a decision (like batting lineup) goes with it for a reasonable period of time, and then makes a change if he doesn't think its working. I would rather this reasoned approach than changing the lineup every 4 days, which would be nonsensical. As for pitchers like Tallet, if you are going to be upset about this kind of stuff then I basically don't see how you can ever be satisfied watching baseball. In terms of Leverage Index the team's relievers go like this: Gregg (2.01), Downs (1.50), Frasor (1.24), Camp (1.12), Tallet (0.65), Purcey (0.46), Janssen (0.45). He basically plays in non-close situations only, and this difference between him and Purcey is not large given they have 15 and 22 appearances respectively, a combined total fewer than any of those front 4 guys.  

Lastly, I don't know where all this Cito screwing over young guys talk is coming from. The only particularly young/non-established players that have come up under Cito have been Snider and Lind, sort of. Lind struggled at various times and Cito stuck with him and made him the DH and number 5 hitter. Snider has admittedly bounced around a bit, but has also struggled and been injured at various times. He hasn't been benched or sent down. I don't really have a problem with young players breaking into the lineup hitting 8th or 9th, given the reasonable strength of our lineup and presumably lesser pressure that comes with hitting later.

If you are pining for Dana Eveland then, well, I don't even know what to say.

China fan - Wednesday, August 11 2010 @ 10:22 AM EDT (#220467) #
Kasi, please don't make absurd statements and then demand calmness from us.  Travis Snider is just 22 years old and already has 517 plate appearances in the major leagues, despite a serious injury this year, and he was given a full-time job this season before his injury, despite being at an age when most prospects are still at the AA level.  Not exactly evidence of discrimination against him.  As for your misquote of Gaston's comments:  it's exasperating because you put it inside quotation marks, implying that it was a verbatim quote of his exact words.  This is becoming an urban legend, and needs to be corrected before people start to believe that Gaston actually said it.  His actual words were much more ambiguous and unclear.  He never said that Overbay and Encarnacion were getting playing time SOLELY to benefit their financial future at the expense of the team.  I challenged you to go back and check his exact words, so that you can see that you misquoted him, but you haven't bothered to research the matter, which suggests that you know you are wrong.  Urban legends and myths tend to develop when comments are twisted and misquoted and then accepted as if they are true, and that's why I corrected you.
Thomas - Wednesday, August 11 2010 @ 10:49 AM EDT (#220473) #
As for pitchers like Tallet, if you are going to be upset about this kind of stuff then I basically don't see how you can ever be satisfied watching baseball. In terms of Leverage Index the team's relievers go like this: Gregg (2.01), Downs (1.50), Frasor (1.24), Camp (1.12), Tallet (0.65), Purcey (0.46), Janssen (0.45). He basically plays in non-close situations only, and this difference between him and Purcey is not large given they have 15 and 22 appearances respectively, a combined total fewer than any of those front 4 guys. 

Good point, and I would bet the LI index for the last two months would have Purcey placed ahead of Tallet, or at the very least the difference between them would be even smaller than it is there. Gaston and the pitching coaches have managed Purcey very well, in my opinion, in adjusting him to the life of a major league reliever. He may have done this well regardless, but it seems like they've made a conscious effort to gradually escalate the leverage of his appearances and also to put him into situations where there are no runners on base. Yesterday, Purcey was warming up in the bullpen, IIRC in the bottom of the 9th inning, presumably to come in to pitch if the Jays had tied the game.
Chuck - Wednesday, August 11 2010 @ 01:11 PM EDT (#220485) #
which is why I ultimately think that Tallet is with the team and not Eveland, even though Dana pitched better

One of these two -- and it wasn't Tallet -- walked more batters than he struck out. That, on its own, merits a one-way ticket out of town. No major league pitcher can be effective doing that. Tallet may not be having a good year, but Eveland was much worse.
Timbuck2 - Wednesday, August 11 2010 @ 02:58 PM EDT (#220496) #
Kasi - I think it's clear by now that you do not want Cito managing this team.  I can respect that.

It's my (and perhaps others) opinion that he should be managing this team past this year.  Can you respect that without trying to beat us over the head with your points?

Playing armchair manager is all fun but at some point you need to sit back and realize that you just don't know enough about what is going on inside the clubhouse.  Nobody who isn't in there with those guys could possible know.  Cito doesn't strike me as the type of guy (from what limited views I get through the window of TV) who does things without reason.  He's been around the game for over 40 years now and he's going to manage his team based on his own personal experiences.

For example - his infamous handling of Shawn Green back in the 90's.  This is, to my recollection, the moment Cito was branded with the "prefers veterans over young players" tag .  Without looking at the numbers (simply because I think they will confuse my point) - what if Shawn just wasn't comfortable batting against lefties and mentioned this to his manager?  What if Cito could see something with in his swing that indicated to Cito (who has YEARS more experience than any fan) that he would struggle against major league quality left handed pitching?  Maybe Cito was helping him during the season to see lefties better and was trying to build his confidence by easing him in against lefties?  You just don't know and never will know.

I think that Mylegacy (who's opinion I respect immensely) said it best earlier on in this thread:

Cito trusts what he's seen over time - he KNOWS JP isn't gonna hit no 2 home runs every game - he loves it - but it's not going to make him put JP in the 4 hole tomorrow and screw with letting the kid finish his development. Cito - I don't agree with lots you do - but I suspect - when I disagree - more often than not I'm the one who's wrong.

Wakamatsu Takes the Fall | 91 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.