I really like this move.  Solid k to BB ratio and although considered a fly ball pitcher he has only given up 15 homers over the past 200 IP.  Great article posted on the processreport.com site just yesterday http://theprocessreport.com/2011/01/16/why-jon-rauch-could-be-the-man-of-the-rays-hour/ which I have pasted below (I hope this is permissible give that above I have given credit to the author):

"Brian Fuentes appears to Oakland-bound, which leaves one more relatively big-named reliever on the market. That reliever is Jon Rauch, who Tommy briefly mentioned last week. The Rays reportedly have interest in Rauch, which should shock no one, and I would offer the chances of him winding up here as decent if only because there are few closer jobs available.

Rauch is an odd bird. He once served as the ace of the U.S. Olympic team and had issues with injuries throughout the minors. A Google Image search returns evidence of Rauch’s myriad of tattoos (including at least two on his neck and one that runs down his spine), a goatee that gives Matt Garza pause, shaggy hair, a downright creepy mug shot, and a few side-by-side comparisons of the 6’11” Rauch and shorter players.

He broke into the majors as a 23-year-old with the Chicago White Sox as a starting pitcher. Eventually the Montreal Expos converted him to relief and he spent his time with the Washington Nationals until heading to Arizona in 2008 in a midseason trade. Rauch again switched teams in 2009, this time heading to Minnesota, where he spent the last season and a half.

Now he’s a relatively obscure free agent coming off a strong season as a late inning reliever with a playoff team. Using xFIP to evaluate Rauch appears to be worthless. He’s a tall dude who gets a lot of flyballs perhaps not by his choice, but his home run per flyball rate is less than 8% for his career and right around 7.5% over the last three seasons.

His BABIP since 2008 is .310 despite 14% of his flyballs being of the infield variety (i.e. auto outs) which seemed unusual, but Jonathan Papelbon holds essentially the same BABIP and infield fly rate (.306 and 13.6%) which should ease the concerns. Rauch’s ERA and FIP since 2008 have been nearly identical (3.66 and 3.64) and not too far off from Kerry Wood (3.55 and 3.43) who signed the baseball equivalent of a sweetheart deal with the Chicago Cubs earlier this offseason.

Rauch may not be Rafael Soriano, but he’s not hittable either. For their careers, a lower percentage of Rauch’s hits allowed have gone for extra bases, while only 0.3% more plate appearances wound up going for two or more. With the exception of a weird 2009, Rauch’s career marks against righties (.238/.280/.372) mostly stand true to form. The same can be said about his career line against lefties (.255/.328/.417) that’s not perfect by any means, but it should play up better in the ninth inning than Octavio Dotel."

Solid k to BB ratio and although considered a fly ball pitcher he has only given up 15 homers over the past 200 IP

Sorry my mistake - actually 15 homers allowed over the last 150IP

I think Farrell will anoint a closer, probably Dotel, at some point during spring training. Having pitchers of roughly equal ability doesn't mean that there is a lack of a clear closer. There is a lack of clarity in bullpen roles if that is the way the manager choses to manage the bullpen and there is a clear closer if the manager decides there will be one.

I think the Jays will want a lefty in the bullpen and Purcey is the leading candidate, by a good margin, for the last spot.

Is there a good reason the Jays couldn't have used this $3.5M to sign a top-shelf prospect instead?

Under JP I would have said the exact same thing, but there's been nothing to suggest that money has gotten in the way of anything AA wanted to do on the international FA market. In a roundabout way the Jays ARE using this 3.5m to sign a prospect - they are just getting a year of service from Rauch in the process.

And can you even get a top-shelf prospect for 3.5m? That's what Cardona cost the Jays, whereas Hechavarria took over 8m guaranteed and obviously Chapman was almost 10x that. I haven't heard anybody refer to Cardona at this moment as a "top-shelf prospect".

There's value in compensation picks, especially if you pick well and invest in developing them, but the name of the game is marginal wins. (Would be interesting to see the range of WARs for each pick rather than just the trendline, I'll get on that...)

I'd also be curious to see a chart like this for FA signing bonuses, or BA rankings which might be good for a laugh. Can't find one offhand...

According to Associated Press Janssen signed for $1.095M.  I guess that's a decent deal for him not sure how well spent it will be for Toronto.  It seems as though Janssen will never be better than average but then again so is his salary in baseball terms.

Is he the largest player to ever play major league baseball? He's listed at 6'11" and 290 in Baseball Reference. Wow.

I read somewhere earlier today that indeed he is.  At a minimum it will be interesting to keep an eye on him next time the Jays and Yanks clear the benches. 

I assume Matthew's point was that you listed all of those other guys, so why not list Abreu? Also, I think there's a greater chance that Abreu pitches 20 innings for the Jays this year than many of those names, including Ray, Reyes and Cordero.

Another interesting question is whether the revamped Jays bullpen will include anyone for the classic long-man 6th-starter role -- the role that Brian Tallet occupied last season.  As currently constituted (if you assume that priority goes to the highest-paid relievers, plus Purcey, Janssen, Camp and Villaneuva), there is no obvious candidate for the long-man role.  Of course Camp and Frasor can go a couple innings if necessary, and of course Janssen and Purcey have backgrounds as starters, but they still look to be mostly one-inning guys.  So does this open a possible job for a Zep or a Richmond in the bullpen, maybe replacing Purcey or Janssen? Or could Janssen be stretched out into the long man?  Or maybe the 6th-man job is irrelevant if there are several good pitchers in Las Vegas (Zep, Mills, or whomever) who can be thrown a spot start in the majors whenever you need someone?

And speaking of traditional roles, is there a LOOGY in the current bullpen?

I'm not necessarily defending the classic conception of "role pitchers" in the bullpen (closer, set-up man, LOOGY, long man) -- I'm just tossing it out for discussion. It will be interesting to see if Farrell believes in these traditional roles, or whether he is willing to go with a more innovative, fluid, flexible bullpen where a bunch of pitchers can handle a bunch of roles on any given day.

Doherty. (I think the first name was Ryan?)

BB-ref suggests that you cheated your namesake out of an inch. Apparently he's 7'1", not a mere 7'.

Question, and not sure where to look this up - how does he pronounce his surname?

The headline to this thread suggests "RAWK" but I'd always assumed it was "ROWSH." Anyone know for sure?

how does he pronounce his surname?

There are pronunciation instructions here.

For some reason I get the feeling that AA & Co. are higher on Lawrie's MLB-readiness than we might think...with 3B and RF both possible destinations for him.

Agreed. Part of the hesitation in acquiring a 3B/OF might be tied to the hope that one or both of Hechavarria/Lawrie are ready for the bigs this year so AA wants to leave his options open.

Two years for Rajai Davis?  Feels unnecessary

It would cost less than 500k to release Davis before 2012, so that seems like a fair price for the Blue Jays to pay for some cost certainty with their 4th OF and a team-friendly option in his final arb year.

I think there's a possibility that Frasor is released come ST.  It may be that their numbers are just too far apart, but otherwise relievers shouldn't be difficult to settle with.

If they release Frasor, they send a message to Dotel, Rauch and Camp for next offseason - don't accept arb!

Having said that, Frasor announcement in 3-2-1....

One thing I do know: Rauch in german means smoke..

Ooh, I smell a possible nickname! Surely jay fans remember (not fondly) the old Tiger reliever Aurelio Lopez? He of the nickname Senor Smoke?

Welcome to the Jay bullpen, Herr Rauch!

I've been speculating about cutting Frasor for months now every time the will-he-or-won't-he-accept-arb conversation came up. If Frasor at his arb price can't bring back anything in trade and the Blue Jays bullpen is healthy Frasor may find himself cut on March 15th - could be 500k well spent if that does indeed force Rauch & Dotel to decline arb heading into 2012.

When I see that Merkin Valdez & Jeremy Accardo broke camp as the 6th and 7th reliever in 2010, I realize that any fretting about too many arms in the bullpen will easily sort itself out over the course of a season.

One reason that Bautista may be is that he is something they don't have in abundance, namely a power hitter and 3B (or even corner outfielder). The Jays have pitching to spare. I don't necessarily think Bautista is in the team's long-range plans, but he could be for that reason alone.

Mike Green is right, as far as is my understanding, in that it is heavily based on those two factors. It all revolves around comparable players and consideration of the player's service time. I don't think CBDC's points about what Frasor may or may not have been able to find on the free agent marketplace would be relevant. Frasor accepted arbitration, as was his contractual right. The reasons for that decision or what Frasor's expected marketplace earnings were had he not accepted arbitration are not particularly pertinent.

The norm in such a deal is that there is, first a guarantee of more than one year, and second, a higher front-end year, than would be achieved in an arbitration decision. I doubt this is of any importance to the internet kids who think the organization should piss away $10 million of Rogers' money on Manny Ramirez, but it's the right focus.

I guess while you were out for a ride on your high horse you missed the contract Votto just signed. Unless his 3/38m contract is strangely structured as 13.75m - 12.5m - 11.75m or something similar, he did not achieve a higher front-end year than would have been achieved in arbitration (and even then it still may not be true).

As for Manny - while it's obvious now (Thome) that it wouldn't take such a big guarantee to bring Manny here, I'm still waiting for a cogent explanation as to why it would be a bad thing for Rogers to spend $ on him (yes, even if it were 10m). And please, don't tell me the money is better spent on kids - we are working from the assumption that AA targets any prospect he wants and that the 2 budgers don't overlap. I've yet to understand why people would rather Rogers save 3-10m and have the Blue Jays field Corey Patterson & Mike McCoy instead of adding Manny Ramirez to the roster.

I'm still waiting for a cogent explanation as to why it would be a bad thing for Rogers to spend $ on him (Manny).

I don't know about it being a "bad" thing.  More like, of the things I have to ponder, do I really care about the Jays signing Manny or not?  If this is a building year, then he's not going to make much of a difference in the team's overall performance anyway, and he'll most likely be gone at the end of the year.  Not to mention the potential he carries with him for clubhouse drama (except I guess I did just mention it). 

I think we may be just quibbling over words without having a difference of opinion, but I don't think this is something that a staff needs to have sabermetricians on board for. It's not about BABIP or xFIP.

The staff would need (as any baseball operations team would have) some individuals with the ability to analyze statistics, but the decision will turn on service time, comparables and past arbitral precedent. I don't think a background in sabermetrics would be pertinent in settling upon a filing number or creating an argument.

Player A has 2411 PA 310r 573h 104hr 375rbi 16sb .266/.337/.476. 1 ASG, 1 Silver Slugger, received MVP votes once.

Player B has 2721 PA 350r 566h 113hr 335rbi 23sb .244/.342/.453. 1 ASG, 1 Silver Slugger, received MVP votes once.

Bautista may be coming off a ridiculous 2010, but I think his side will have a hard time justifying a 437% raise when an OF like Ryan Ludwick with similar career totals only gets a 25% raise. Look at the arb criteria :

1. "quality of the Player’s contribution to his Club during the past season" - Huge win for Bautista.

2. "the length and consistency of his career contribution" - Let's call this a toss up. Both have been inconsistent players but Ludwick has been consistently better.

3. "the record of the Player’s past compensation" - Huge win for Ludwick. Ludwick made 5.45m, Bautista 2.4m in 2010.

4. "comparative baseball salaries" - This is the one that links Ludwick & Bautista. Ludwick settled for 6.8m. Bautista is asking for 10.5m.

5. "existence of any physical or mental defects on the part of the Player" - Impossible for fans to know, but I find it interesting this is explicitly mentioned - it could be part of the reason Votto was willing to just take the 3/38 guarantee instead of trying to milk every last dollar by going to arb 3 times - the Reds could prey on his mental stability in a courtroom.

6. "and the recent performance record of the Club including but not limited to its League standing and attendance as an indication of public acceptance" - Another clear win for Ludwick. SD almost won their division and drew significantly better than the Blue Jays last year.

Any evidence may be submitted which is relevant to the above criteria, and the arbitration panel shall assign such weight to the evidence as shall appear appropriate under the circumstances. And there you have it. Under these guidelines, would you award Bautista the 10.5m he's looking for after making 2.4m in 2010 when a similar player received nowhere close to that size contract or raise? Would you really assign Bautista's 2010 season THAT much weight?

I just can't see how Bautista's side can claim he's worthy of such special consideration. Howard was a groundbreaking case but he at least had 3 straight monster years before arb, including a Rookie of the Year & MVP award. Even so, many thought the only reason Howard won his 10m was because the Phillies lowballed Howard on their offer of 7m considering Miguel Cabrera had earned 7.4m in arb1 the year before. If Bautista's side had filed for under 10m it would be a better battle, but I think the 10.5m is just too high for the arbitrator to reasonably award, whereas the 7.6m is not too low.

I wouldn't expect the likelihood of regression will factor into the arbitrator's decision. The arbitrator isn't predicting Bautista's projection for 2011, he's awarding Bautista a salary for 2011 based on his past production.

Anyway, thanks for taking the time to go through the arb panel valuation points. I enjoyed your post and while Ludwick might not be the best comparison for the reason you point out (Bautista's much better most recent season) I agree with your conclusion that the Jays have made a winnable offer.

My two cents. Isn't the best comparable Carlos Pena? Pena hit the jackpot in 2008 for an age 29 breakout season almost identical to Bautista's. His career to that point in service time, raw numbers, quality of breakout season, was similar to Bautista, better in some respects (ie, more HRs in fewer games, better avg. season and better pre-breakout seasons) and worse in others (he didn't consistently stay in the Majors). He avoided arbitration by signing a three-year deal that paid him $6 million in 2008 (a raise from $800,000), $24 million for three years. MLB average salary growth has been minimal since 2008, something less than five per cent overall. The most recent similar power hitter arb decision is Howard. Bautista is asking for more than Howard was awarded in 2008, but with a weaker case in raw career totals to that point and a much weaker case on an average year basis (ie, consistency), awards, team accomplishment, franchise impact, etc. The Jays are offering Bautista 25 per cent more than Pena negotiated with the Rays, slightly more than the Phillies offered Howard three years ago, close to what the Giants offered Lincecum last year, about a million less than the Rangers are offering Hamilton this year. Club arb offers to other free agents may not have any bearing to the panel, but Bautista can hardly be insulted by the blueblood company the Jays are putting him in. I don't think there's any danger of Bautista being pissed off by this process unless someone mentions steroid allegations, which seems most unlikely.

I do agree with you China Fan that the Jays are working on a deal with Bautista. The Rays' three-year deal with Pena proved generous to the player and probably one year too long. Last year, the Giants and Lincecum avoided arbitration with a two-year deal for $25 million, which ended up as a win-win for the two parties.  I'd like to see the Jays and Bautista do something similar, avoid arb and work out a two-year deal for about $20 million (an extra club option year for 2013 would be good for the team, perhaps not for Bautista). It's close to what Bautista wants now, times two years. It would leave Bautista with another chance for a big contract at age 32 without putting all the pressure on him to perform this year. If he hits 22 HRs this year, 40 next year, he'll still be a prime free agent. It's a gamble for the Jays but not an onerous long-term commitment. Even if the Jays win the arb case, if they try to keep Jose on a longer-term deal (obviously only if he's mashing) it's going to cost them close to $20 mill over the next two years anyway. It gives the Jays a bigger window to consider extending him beyond 2012; if they don't want to or Bautista says no, it makes him a more valuable trading chip than he would be as a free agent in just 10 months.

I understand you a little better now, Mike, but I still don't see how that changes anything. Who is the Bautista camp going to point to to find a comparative baseball salary that shows JoBau is worth 10.5m? Under what circumstance can #4 be used for Bautista's benefit? The only precedent I see here is Howard, who asked for less than Bautista with a better track record, an MVP trophy for special consideration, and a World Series ring to top it off.

I really hope that you're wrong, China Fan, because I can't see the Jays getting any value on a Bautista extension if his asking price is 10.5m. It's a good point that a 3 year deal for Bautista potentially makes him more valuable on the trade market come July. However, I still don't see the benefit to the Blue Jays. To make the extension worthwhile, Bautista needs to be very good in 2011 again, but if he is then the worst case scenario for Toronto is Type A compensation & 10m to spend on other players. Furthermore, as was already mentioned, a Bautista extension would make me really scratch my head over the Marcum trade and lack of involvement on the FA market this offseason - are you ready to start adding elite pieces to the team's future or not? If you are, why would you keep Bautista while trading Marcum (potentially filling Bautista's position) and sitting out the FA market?

I'm with DaveB on the hurt feelings - AA said all the right things on 590 yesterday in terms of how the team goes about the negotiation, and seemed to make a point to say that they stay far away from confrontation.

92-93, doesn't "the length and consistency of his career contribution" equate to looking at past performance?

Mike seemed to be saying that for "past performance" considerations, 2010 would weigh more heavily than earlier seasons. I was trying to show that to be incorrect - "the length and consistency of his career contribution" is it's own criteria, separate from the player's most recent season. If you use the player's past performance to judge the length and consistency of his career contribution, there is absolutely no difference between the stats accumulated in 2010 and 2004.
 

MiLB.com: Was getting dealt to Toronto exciting for you and your family?

#ques_include {width:230px;float:right;margin-left:5px;} #ques_content {border-top:1px solid #000000;border-left:1px solid #000000;border-bottom:1px solid #000000;border-right:1px solid #000000;padding-left:5px;} .ques_schedule {margin-top:5px;font-size:11px;} .ques_dates {font-size:11px;font-style:italic;color:#999;}

Lawrie: It was very exciting for me being a Canadian kid. It's a great feeling to come back to Canada and have the Canadian flag on my chest again. It's the first time I've felt welcome in a long time.

 I wonder what this says about the Brewers minor league system long term.

Yes, service time is quite important. I don't think that limits it solely to players of the same year of eligibility, but those are the most instructive comparables. I imagine, based on positional factors, each side will likely come in with players who have slightly less service time, arguing that their statistical similarities make them strong comparables for Bautista, but neither side will gain much traction from using Scott Rolen or Carlos Lee as comparables, because of the service time (and free agency) gap.

Make the assumption that Marc Rzepczynski is in the Starting Rotation.  

Jon Rauch, Octavio Dotel, Carlos Villanueva and David Purcey are in the bullpen.   Shawn Camp, Jason Frasor and Casey Janssen all have better numbers than any of our LHP.  

My question is:

Who is the second LHP in the Bullpen? 

For what it's worth, Jeremy Sandler in the National Post argues that the Jays should have coughed up a bit more money to avoid an arbitration hearing with Bautista.

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2011/01/19/arbitration-could-cost-jays-more-than-cash/

Well, the answer as to which LH reliever is the furthest up on the club's depth charts, if Rzepczynski is a starter in Toronto or Las Vegas, is probably Jesse Carlson. However, your question presupposes that the team needs a second left-hander in the bullpen. I'm not convinced that's necessary (and even breaking camp with 6 right-hander relievers wouldn't mean much, as injuries or poor performance will likely open a spot before too long has passed).

Guys, the CBA is your friend, and it's written in English. The answers lie within.

This shall not limit the ability of a Player or his representative, because of special accomplishment, to argue the equal relevance of salaries of Players without regard to service, and the arbitration panel shall give whatever weight to such argument as is deemed appropriate.

Bautista's entire case, I believe, relies on heavy weight being given to this final clause. The emphasis is mine.

I agree. I don't think Bautista would get very far trying to base a substantial degree of his case on that clause. They may include that argument, based on the idea of special accomplishments of 2010, but it won't be the basis of the case. It's very hard to argue the comparables are informative if they have significantly more service time and games played and have secured their contract on the free agent market. The Jays would counter by arguing Bautista is comparing apples to oranges and thus the arbitrator must base his ruling on their set of comparables.

As TamRa says, the presence of the clause does not mean it's an effective path for an argument. I would be very surprised if Bautista tried to base any substantial portion of his case on this clause and shocked if it succeeded. Free agency and arbitration are two different beasts and the price on the former market does not inform the decisions of arbitrators.