Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
Saturday began quietly, but ended with a flurry of deals, including Ubaldo Jimenez. Here’s the place to discuss yesterday’s trades and any deals consummated today.

On Saturday, a flurry of trades were completed. Doug Fister and David Pauley went from Seattle to Detroit in a six-player swap. Jerry Hairston was sent from Washington to Milwaukee for a minor league outfielder. Koji Uehera, who has had a very good year in Baltimore’s bullpen, was traded to Texas for Chris Davis, who has stalled a bit at Triple-A, and reliever Tommy Hunter.

The big prize, Ubaldo Jimenez, was won by Cleveland, who parted with prized pitching prospects Alex White and Drew Pomeranz, along with two other minor leaguers, to land the pitcher. The deal appeared to be completed prior to Colorado’s game, but apparently wasn’t finalized as the game neared and Jimenez was sent to the mound in the first inning, where he promptly surrendered four runs. He was then lifted, as the trade had been completed. Cleveland wasn’t finished, as they swapped Orlando Cabrera to San Francisco for minor league outfielder Thomas Neal, who projects as a reasonable fourth outfielder.

St. Louis continued to keep their eye on the prize in 2011, possibly the last year for Pujols, as they acquired Rafael Furcal for a minor league outfielder who is known to not be on the team’s 40-man roster. The Red Sox also improved, landing Canadian Rich Harden for first base prospect Lars Anderson, who has lost some his shine over the past two seasons, and a PTBNL. The Red Sox also picked up Mike Aviles from Kansas City for Yamaico Navarro and a minor leaguer.

Finally, the impossible-to-root-against Pirates acquired Derrek Lee from Baltimore, pushing an underperforming Lyle Overbay to the bench, for a minor league first baseman.

Trading Deadline Chatter | 66 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
smcs - Sunday, July 31 2011 @ 02:45 AM EDT (#239809) #
Harden deal fell threw. Surprise, surprise: the Red Sox didn't like something they saw in his medicals.

The Jays are also reportedly in on Chris Iannetta, for some reason. He's under contract through next year and has a 2013 team option on it, He's had massive home-road splits this year, and can't hit righties for power, but maintains his good discipline. Call him the anti-Arencibia. Only makes sense if they are planning on moving or dropping Molina, I think.
Dave Rutt - Sunday, July 31 2011 @ 08:14 AM EDT (#239815) #
Iannetta would be a very good backup, but there's this guy named Travis d'Arnaud who's almost ready. Unless AA is trying to acquire someone big with a package centred around d'Arnaud, I don't get it.

Speaking of d'Arnaud, what's the plan for him? Assuming he finishes the year in New Hampshire (and maybe grabs a cup of coffee afterwards), I'd start him in Vegas in 2012 but call him up in the first half of the year if he seems ready. His offensive game is already pretty refined, unlike that of some other Fisher Cats like Gose and Hech.

Next question: what do you do with two starting-calibre catchers if the time comes? I'd split their time somewhat evenly and get them into more games by DHing. Thames, who will presumably be the full-time DH next year, can rest vs. lefties and/or play the field when Snider, Bautista or Lawrie (Jose to 3rd) needs a day off, leaving enough at bats for Thames to basically be a full-time player and the catchers to play about 100 games each.
boz - Sunday, July 31 2011 @ 09:08 AM EDT (#239817) #
Anyone know why McDade didn,t play in either end of the double header last night,days off before the trade deadline always raise eyebrows.
85bluejay - Sunday, July 31 2011 @ 09:11 AM EDT (#239818) #
If the jays acquire Iannetta, I would bet the farm that JP is the catcher that will be moved - D'Arnaud is not only the better allround catcher but he's also AA's guy - JP was drafted by the previous gm & usually Gm's have a affinity (naturally) to the players they acquire - Home runs aside, I have not been impressed by JP's play.
bpoz - Sunday, July 31 2011 @ 09:14 AM EDT (#239819) #
AA has the reputation for being silent. NYY have been very silent.
85bluejay - Sunday, July 31 2011 @ 09:16 AM EDT (#239820) #
I think after the Jays experience with Lind as DH, the club will shy away from using a young player as DH & use a veteran like EE - I anticipate that either Thames or Snider will be moved by next spring .
85bluejay - Sunday, July 31 2011 @ 09:36 AM EDT (#239821) #
How wonderfully wacky is the baseball world - Last Sept. when Lyle Overbay's tenure was coming to an end in TO, I watched a clip where he said he wanted to play for a contender and not another rebuilding team - he ended up with the Pirates as a last resort - now the Pirates are contending, Overbay in not producing & the acquisition of Lee probably means the end of Overbay as a Pirate. 
China fan - Sunday, July 31 2011 @ 09:43 AM EDT (#239822) #

Iannetta has a career OBP of .357, which would be a huge upgrade on Arencibia.   I suppose the comparison depends on your expectation of Arencibia's performance in future years and whether he will significantly improve.  But it's worth noting that Iannetta posted an OPS of .895 at the age of 25, compared to Arencibia's OPS of .743 this season at the same age.

China fan - Sunday, July 31 2011 @ 09:49 AM EDT (#239823) #
One other point:  I agree that d'Arnaud is a great prospect, but realistically he won't be ready until 2013 (or optimistically the second half of 2012) and it might be best to work him in as a back-up for a season.  If the Jays are trying to acquire Iannetta, it suggests that Anthopolous is serious about competing in 2012. 
greenfrog - Sunday, July 31 2011 @ 09:52 AM EDT (#239824) #
Fwiw, Iannetta's career road stats (away from Coors): 207/340/372.

I doubt that acquiring Iannetta would be to provide an upgrade at starting catcher. More likely he would serve as a solid backup and veteran presence until d'Arnaud is ready (which could be in mid-2012 or later). He might also keep Arencibia from becoming complacent.
greenfrog - Sunday, July 31 2011 @ 09:54 AM EDT (#239825) #
Braves acquire Bourn:

http://twitter.com/#!/Ken_Rosenthal/statuses/97664392140816384

The NL playoff picture is looking more and more interesting...
ramone - Sunday, July 31 2011 @ 10:30 AM EDT (#239828) #
No escobar or Snider in the lineup today.
damos - Sunday, July 31 2011 @ 10:35 AM EDT (#239829) #
No Lind either. 
BlueJayWay - Sunday, July 31 2011 @ 10:40 AM EDT (#239830) #
I can understand no Snider or Lind.  Another tough lefty on the mound today, and both have been slumping lately.

But no Escobar?  He missed half of yesterday's game, and tomorrow's an off day.  Hard to believe it's just a day off.  Maybe some kind of punishment for loafing down the line yesterday and foolishly getting tossed?

Richard S.S. - Sunday, July 31 2011 @ 03:04 PM EDT (#239836) #

If someone like S.F. Giants were interested in Jose Molina?

Why is Travis d'Arnaud being rushed to the majors, I thought 2013/14 was the plan?

Why the leaks?  A.A's deals thus far, are much more quiet.

Kelekin - Sunday, July 31 2011 @ 03:19 PM EDT (#239837) #
I think Iannetta provides a solid back-up with OBP skills and he's been criminally under-rated in his career. It'd be interesting to see what we have to give up, though.

Safe to say Jeroloman isn't getting a shot at the back-up job, though.

Also, love that Jimenez trade for the Rockies.  They got Cleveland's two best pitching prospects, one of which is already MLB ready.

TamRa - Sunday, July 31 2011 @ 03:21 PM EDT (#239838) #
A. the truism goes "if you have heard rumors, it's not what AA is actually doing"

B. If on the off chance the Jays were going to get Ianetta, they almost certainly have something in place for Molina.

C. EVERY signal from the jays speaks AGAINST the idea that the jays would move d'Arnaud quickly. On the contrary, i wouldn't be AT ALL surprised if he spent all of 2012 and the first 2 months of 2013 in Vegas, then got promoted in time for them to evaluate whether to trade JPA at the deadline in 2013 or over the winter.

D. that said, you can never be sure when either would be the key to a major trade - but not now.

E. Ianetta as a bridge back-up until d'Arnaud arrives makes a lot of sense. he's under control, and much younger than Molina. And remember, other than this year, Molina can't hit either.



another report had the Jays checking in on Wandy Rodriguez - i can't believe that's anything more than due dilligance.


TamRa - Sunday, July 31 2011 @ 03:22 PM EDT (#239839) #

But no Escobar?  He missed half of yesterday's game, and tomorrow's an off day.  Hard to believe it's just a day off.  Maybe some kind of punishment for loafing down the line yesterday and foolishly getting tossed?


Farrell denied - like he has a choice, no way he would admit it officially, but it HAS to be. doesn't it?
Kelekin - Sunday, July 31 2011 @ 03:51 PM EDT (#239841) #
Agreed on D'Arnaud there.  I really see no reason to rush him up.  Let him spend most of 2012 at AAA, and bring him up in August or September.
bpoz - Monday, August 01 2011 @ 09:27 AM EDT (#239860) #
I was always very concerned about burning options. AA says it is not so crucial a thing.
An option was burned on Z Stewart but he was traded so it does not matter to the Jays. So AA has his method of using options.
B Mills has no options left for 2012, but it looks like he is ML ready and the rest of the year will make that evaluation more clear.

I don't know how Sierra,Goes, Knect & Marisnick will get playing time especially if Rasmus,Snider & Thames put up good numbers that they show flashes of. Same thing with the high ceiling SPs we have that are currently dominating their leagues.

d'Arnaud would be extremely valuable if JPA got injured and we were competing, so I would find a way to get him ML ABs as soon as he is ready.

uglyone - Monday, August 01 2011 @ 10:35 AM EDT (#239862) #
I can't think of even one half-decent reason NOT to give D'Arnaud a september look.
Flex - Monday, August 01 2011 @ 11:16 AM EDT (#239864) #
B Mills has no options left for 2012

Optioning a player once in a season doesn't mean you can't option them again that season. Options are unlimited within any one season.
Flex - Monday, August 01 2011 @ 11:20 AM EDT (#239865) #
Sorry bpoz I think I misread you. You were talking about next year.
greenfrog - Monday, August 01 2011 @ 11:32 AM EDT (#239867) #
The Rangers' Jon Daniels made some impressive deadline moves. Adding Mike Adams for non-elite prospects and Koji Uehara for Chris Davis and Tommy Hunter was pretty deft. The Jays, Atlanta, Philly and Boston also pulled off what look like good trades.
Mick Doherty - Monday, August 01 2011 @ 02:41 PM EDT (#239874) #
Fantasy baseballers, go get Mike Adams and protect him for next year. After Feliz finally moves to the rotation -- some say his '11 inconsistency is due in part to his looking ahead to that already -- Adams will be good for 45 saves in 2012.
Magpie - Monday, August 01 2011 @ 06:12 PM EDT (#239878) #
Options are unlimited within any one season.

Just ask Mike McCoy. Meanwhile, the Pirates have DFA'd Lyle Overbay, whose bat seems to have disappeared over yonder cliff.
Flex - Monday, August 01 2011 @ 06:15 PM EDT (#239879) #
Just looking at the MLB standings is so depressing. After Boston and NY, no other team in baseball, besides the Phillies, would rank higher than 3rd in the AL East.

And remember when Boston got off to such a terrible start to the season everyone thought they might be done? They're on pace to win 101 games. Wild card pace is 98 wins.

Sigh.
hypobole - Monday, August 01 2011 @ 09:00 PM EDT (#239883) #
Not to take anything away from Pat Gillick - a window of opportunity presented itself and he seized it, - but  during the 92 championship season, both Boston and New York finished with sub .500 records (and Boston under .500 in 93 as well).  Looking at those teams now, sadly for other AL East teams,  the question isn't when but if that will happen again.
dan gordon - Monday, August 01 2011 @ 10:49 PM EDT (#239884) #
Fortunately, it seems like a reasonable probability they are going to add another wild card spot, maybe as soon as next year, so the Jays could make the post-season by finishing 3rd.  Now if only they would go to a balanced schedule, to give them a fair shot, and keep in mind, it's not just the extra games vs NYY and Boston that make their schedule more difficult, but the Jays' interleague "rivalry" matchup is usually Philadelphia and Atlanta, two of the best NL teams.
Matthew E - Monday, August 01 2011 @ 11:34 PM EDT (#239888) #
That idea doesn't appeal to me at all.

I'm still about as pessimistic as I ever was, even in the middle of some very impressive roster-building by Anthopoulos, but defeatist or not, I don't like the prospect of the Jays making the playoffs by finishing third.

I don't care how hard it is. I want to see the Jays beat the Red Sox and Yankees, not get a pat on the head for never being able to beat them. (And if they do beat them, I don't want the mattressflippers to end up in the playoffs against Toronto anyway.) I want to see the Jays leave the rest of the world with nothing to do but tip their hats to the undisputed best team, and Bud Selig can take his extra wild card spot, roll it into a cone, and sit on it.

uglyone - Tuesday, August 02 2011 @ 12:37 AM EDT (#239889) #
The Red Sox sure didn't seem to mind taking advantage of a new extra playoff spot to break their 85-year long world series drought.

Not to many people have asterisked that one thanks to them making the playoffs by "only finishing 2nd".
Matthew E - Tuesday, August 02 2011 @ 09:13 AM EDT (#239891) #
Nevertheless.
bpoz - Tuesday, August 02 2011 @ 09:54 AM EDT (#239895) #
High standards... Matthew E!!! Please er.. actually you did give details about your comment. Also TB did it without a 2nd WC.

But how about a WC as the 2nd + a WS. Not bad right. Instead of a 1st and no WS. Who would remember.

Still this year looks like it would be a group of lesser teams (5gm back of 1st WC).
I also look forward to some tie breakers. But the math will kill me.

Ryan Day - Tuesday, August 02 2011 @ 09:58 AM EDT (#239896) #
I liked the idea someone floated a few years ago - two wild card teams, but they play a one-game playoff to determine who enters the "real" playoffs.
ayjackson - Tuesday, August 02 2011 @ 10:39 AM EDT (#239900) #
Personally, I hate the one-game playoff idea.  What a roll of the dice!  162 games for that?
BlueJayWay - Tuesday, August 02 2011 @ 10:41 AM EDT (#239902) #
Just looking at the MLB standings is so depressing. After Boston and NY, no other team in baseball, besides the Phillies, would rank higher than 3rd in the AL East.

This division just sucks to play in.  It's become depressing.

It's gotten to the point where I don't really even care about other teams around baseball.  The Giants had a nice season last year, and won the WS, but they wouldn't have even made the playoffs if they had to play here.  A big deal was made about the Pirates being in first place recently, but they'd be buried if they played here and no one would notice.  Etc.

When people are excited about other teams, and they're in a "race" and the deadline moves they make and all this and that, I just find it hard to care.  I can only think of where they'd be if they played in the ALE, and the answer is usually...nowhere.
Spifficus - Tuesday, August 02 2011 @ 10:55 AM EDT (#239903) #
It's better than not being in it at all. Also, it puts the emphasis back on winning the division, which is where it should be. I see few drawbacks to the WC playoff game and the one that comes up the most - WC1 burning their ace to win the division, and getting bounced by WC2 - is easily outweighed by the benefits (Losing your ace that way means there was a legitimate pennant race again! How is this a bad thing? Also, more teams have a chance to make the playoffs without really diluting the value of the regular season.)
hypobole - Tuesday, August 02 2011 @ 01:05 PM EDT (#239919) #
It really is depressing being over .500 and still basically being out of playoff contention before August rolls around. And maybe for any team not named the Rays, Jays or Orioles, the one and done playoff may not be ideal, but it would seem to me as being an advantage. The odds of us beating either of the 2 powerhouses once would be much better than over a more prolonged series.
Chuck - Tuesday, August 02 2011 @ 03:09 PM EDT (#239945) #
Personally, I hate the one-game playoff idea.  What a roll of the dice!  162 games for that?

SIng it, brother. I'm for fewer playoff teams, not more. I'm for the regular season meaning more, not less. Have two leagues with no divisions, with the top two teams in each league playing for the pennant. Old school, baby.

Of course, this means less fan interest with fewer teams in playoff races. And it means fewer playoff games. All of this means less money in the owners' pockets. And that ain't gonna happen.

But it would be more pristine. Let's not head in the direction of the NHL and NBA where you play for 6 months to do little more than establish post-season seeding.

All this feel good chatter about the long woeful .500 Pirates being in a playoff race... yechhhh. We're now in the business of celebrating mediocrity?
greenfrog - Tuesday, August 02 2011 @ 03:29 PM EDT (#239948) #
Watching Boston and New York secure the only AL playoff spots every year (say, 8 or 9 years out of 10) isn't exactly my idea of a good time. Reminds me of that Onion article about the Yankees signing every player in baseball:

http://www.onionsportsnetwork.com/articles/yankees-ensure-2003-pennant-by-signing-every-playe,32/
Chuck - Tuesday, August 02 2011 @ 03:44 PM EDT (#239950) #

Watching Boston and New York secure the only AL playoff spots every year

With the understanding that an unbalanced schedule has often favoured non-AL east teams, here are the top two AL teams every year since 2000. Not as much NY/Bos as you'd think (or at least not as much as I would have thought).

2011: Bos, NY
2010: TB, NY
2009: NY, LA
2008: LA, TB
2007: Bos, Cle
2006: NY, Min
2005: Chi, NY/Bos/LA
2004: NY, Bos
2003: NY, Oak
2002: NY, Oak
2001: Sea, Oak
2000: Chi, Oak/Sea

Mick Doherty - Tuesday, August 02 2011 @ 04:40 PM EDT (#239959) #

Great post, Chuck. And only twice in that time were NYY and BOS the top two! Nine different teams, including six that made it more than once and only one that made it even half the time. But neither  of last year's WS teams is on the list at all ...

  • NYY - 8
  • OAK - 4
  • BOS - 4
  • LAA - 3
  • CHW - 2
  • SEA - 2
  • CLE - 1
  • MIN - 1
  • TB -1
Matthew E - Tuesday, August 02 2011 @ 04:49 PM EDT (#239960) #
Well, I wouldn't really expect the Giants to be on that list.
hypobole - Tuesday, August 02 2011 @ 04:50 PM EDT (#239961) #

SIng it, brother. I'm for fewer playoff teams, not more. I'm for the regular season meaning more, not less. Have two leagues with no divisions, with the top two teams in each league playing for the pennant. Old school, baby.


Did old school have cable TV? A balanced schedule ain't gonna happen  Eastern 7 pm games are 4 pm on the west coast, and west 7 pm games are 10 pm in the East. Not good for ratings. I will happily watch the Jays in a one game playoff. If the oldschoolers don't want to watch, fine.

We're now in the business of celebrating mediocrity?

As opposed to the Yankees and Red Sox purchasing superiority?

greenfrog - Tuesday, August 02 2011 @ 05:44 PM EDT (#239969) #
"here are the top two AL teams every year since 2000"

I think to produce a meaningful analysis of which teams would have finished 1-2 in a free-for-all AL (ie, without divisions), you have to factor in the unbalanced schedule. It would be interesting to see how many non-AL East teams get filtered out by such an analysis.

Even without such an analysis, it's interesting to note that Boston or NY has held down one of the top two AL positions in 9 of the last 10 years (with the two teams finishing 1-2 twice). So, within the last 10 years:

- The 12 non-Boston/NY teams would have been competing for one playoff spot seven times

- In two of those years, none of those 12 teams would have made the playoffs

- In the remaining year, 2 of the 12 teams would have made the playoffs.

Purist or not, those are some pretty long odds if you're a fan of an AL team not named Boston or NY.
BlueJayWay - Tuesday, August 02 2011 @ 06:13 PM EDT (#239974) #
SIng it, brother. I'm for fewer playoff teams, not more. I'm for the regular season meaning more, not less. Have two leagues with no divisions, with the top two teams in each league playing for the pennant. Old school, baby.

Of course, this means less fan interest with fewer teams in playoff races. And it means fewer playoff games. All of this means less money in the owners' pockets. And that ain't gonna happen.


Yeah, that won't be happening.   And thank god.

I couldn't care less about the less money in owners' pockets.  What I would care about is less fan interest.  Call me crazy, but I think baseball is better with more fan interest.
CeeBee - Tuesday, August 02 2011 @ 07:02 PM EDT (#239984) #
"I couldn't care less about the less money in owners' pockets. What I would care about is less fan interest. Call me crazy, but I think baseball is better with more fan interest."
Amen to that! Purists can always watch golf or tennis I guess. :)
D. King - Tuesday, August 02 2011 @ 10:12 PM EDT (#239987) #
So, if the Orioles picked up Jo-Jo to take the spot of Arrieta who it appears is headed for the surgeon's table, then that means that we get to face hi this week, right?

Excellent.

What is the over/under on Joey's home run total in that game?
smcs - Tuesday, August 02 2011 @ 11:24 PM EDT (#239989) #
Personally, I hate the one-game playoff idea.  What a roll of the dice!  162 games for that?

But 5 and 7 game series are much more indicative of overall ability and the better team always wins there, right?

Whatever changes they make to the playoffs, just make sure that what happened in '93 doesn't happen again. SFG had the 2nd best record in the league (103 wins) but didn't play a playoff game. I'd like to see a one-game playoff between 4th and 5th and allow the best team to pick their opponent.
ayjackson - Wednesday, August 03 2011 @ 08:45 AM EDT (#239997) #

But 5 and 7 game series are much more indicative of overall ability and the better team always wins there, right?

Yes and no.

Personally, I'd prefer a 9 game WS.  I'm not sure how else my ideal postseason looks like, but it doesn't involve coin flips for wildcard spots.

bpoz - Wednesday, August 03 2011 @ 09:39 AM EDT (#239999) #
On the Rasmus trade and a few others the Jays took on/paid Big $. I notice a few other teams have done similar things for their trades to take place.

In the spirit of humor or maybe seriously some bauxites have suggested that Owners of sports teams are greedy and can even be cheapskates.

So putting it all together, I wonder if these $ deals, when received by rich teams are book keeping to avoid the Luxury Tax thresh hold.
Ryan Day - Wednesday, August 03 2011 @ 10:07 AM EDT (#240001) #
If the Jays ever find themselves in a sudden-death playoff game, I think I'd like to see Ricky Romero on the mound. I have a very good feeling whenever he starts.
bpoz - Wednesday, August 03 2011 @ 11:56 AM EDT (#240006) #
All our speculation on roster moves is interesting reading.

Without the 2nd WC the odds are still long. But with the extra WC I am convinced that we can compete for it. Right now we are 3.5gm back of LAA who hold that position.

Our speculations, IMO are more valid now to me because I believe. I just looked, the 2010 extra WC would be Boston, with the Jays 4 gm behind them.
I would feel even more positive if we were to put the best team possible on the field in 2012, even though that team looks to be inexperienced. I am willing to accept the cost of not winning the extra WC for staying with our youth through their struggles and also for not over paying for a proven Closer.
DaveB - Wednesday, August 03 2011 @ 03:20 PM EDT (#240031) #
Re the possibility of an extra WC spot: You don't need a second WC to have both a fairer and more interesting PO race than the current system. Go back to the pre-1994 format of two divisions and a nearly balanced schedule, reduce inter-league play to 6-8 games. The division winners and the next two teams with the best record regardless of division make the playoffs. That would essentially guarantee any team over .500 of being in a division or WC playoff race without further dilution of the regular season.
Matthew E - Wednesday, August 03 2011 @ 03:39 PM EDT (#240037) #
Well, here's what I think: I don't really care if an 88-win team is in a race or not. It's only an 88-win team. It doesn't really deserve to be in contention. If they luck into a weak division and finish first with that record, fine; fair and square. But I don't see the need to change the rules to accommodate them.

Once we start talking about 95-win teams, that's different. If your playoff format is such that it normally excludes 95-win teams from participating in the postseason, you might want to look at changing it.

In the case of the Jays, I'm not going to complain about the playoff system until they're good enough to win 95 games. If they can't do that, they shouldn't be playing in October in the first place.

92-93 - Wednesday, August 03 2011 @ 04:11 PM EDT (#240045) #
That's a nice belief, but it's hard to stick to your convictions when you see the St. Louis Cardinals perennially contending and winning a World Series with 83 wins.
Matthew E - Wednesday, August 03 2011 @ 04:21 PM EDT (#240049) #
They did that once. And, sure, it was kind of silly, but they won their division. It was a weak division, but they didn't choose to be in it, so it's not like they put one over on us.

And then there was the 1991 American League, where the Jays finished first with 91 wins but would still have been in first if they had won 85. Meanwhile, the Angels finished dead last in the AL West with an 81-81 record. If the Jays were in that division that year, they would have been a weak second place.

The random tides of competition giveth and the random tides of competition taketh away.

DaveB - Wednesday, August 03 2011 @ 04:55 PM EDT (#240053) #
In the case of the Jays, I'm not going to complain about the playoff system until they're good enough to win 95 games. If they can't do that, they shouldn't be playing in October in the first place.

Being in a race is one thing, being good enough to win it is something else, whether it takes 83 wins to win your division or 90-95 for a WC. I don't see anything wrong with four teams making the playoffs, the problem is the inequity of an unbalanced schedule and randomness of inter-league play. Adding a second WC doesn't address the problem.
Magpie - Wednesday, August 03 2011 @ 05:59 PM EDT (#240059) #
Watching Boston and New York secure the only AL playoff spots every year

Hey, it could be worse. Cast your mind back to the days before the wild card, before the league was split in two divisions, before free agency. When each league produced one first place team. Here's who came out of the AL from 1936 through 1964. Twenty-nine seasons:

New York Yankees: 22 times
Detroit Tigers: 2 times (1940, 1945)
Cleveland Indians: 2 times (1948, 1954)
Boston Red Sox: 1 time (1946)
St. Louis Browns: 1 time (1944)
Chicago White Sox: 1 time (1959)
Washington Senators: Thanks for playing
Philadelphia A's: Thanks for playing
Alex Obal - Wednesday, August 03 2011 @ 06:11 PM EDT (#240061) #
A giant castle on the beach which is impervious to any random tides.
bpoz - Wednesday, August 03 2011 @ 06:12 PM EDT (#240062) #
I have no class. Every time some weak undeserving team gets in I hope it is the Jays.

And further more I will take a WS championship, because of errors and even unfair umpire decisions.

But I will wait 3 years before bragging about it.
TamRa - Wednesday, August 03 2011 @ 08:34 PM EDT (#240075) #
The division winners and the next two teams with the best record regardless of division make the playoffs

one step further - have no divisions at all and take the 4 best teams period.
Mike Green - Wednesday, August 03 2011 @ 09:00 PM EDT (#240076) #
A few points about the Yankee period of dominance. The dominance was much more complete in the 1951-1964 Mantle/Berra/Ford era than in the 1936-1950 DiMaggio/Dickey era. The completeness of the Yankee dominance in the second half of the era probably has a lot to do with the fact that American League teams were so slow to integrate. Bill Veeck's clubs were the exception, and they did compete with the Yankees in the 50s. You would think that getting beat up year after year would make AL teams other than the Yankees have a gander over at the NL and stars like Aaron and Mays and realize what a mistake they had been making, but it took a long, long time. Prejudices die hard.
Magpie - Wednesday, August 03 2011 @ 09:39 PM EDT (#240077) #
American League teams were so slow to integrate.

Including the Yankees, of course. There was Elston Howard and... that's about it. Howard had to sit, and fill in at various spots, while waiting for Yogi to get old. Casey Stengel complained that upon finally getting an African-American player (not the word Casey used), "I get the only one who can't run." Al Downing arrived near the end of their run. Can't think of anyone else...
Matthew E - Wednesday, August 03 2011 @ 10:18 PM EDT (#240078) #
Suitcase Simpson. I was thinking Vic Power, but he never actually played for the Yankees.

DaveB: I don't get your point.

DaveB - Thursday, August 04 2011 @ 04:14 AM EDT (#240090) #
Sorry Matthew. My post shouldn't have included that particular quote from your earlier comment.. There wasn't really a connection between it and my reply, other than to continue the playoff discussion.
Trading Deadline Chatter | 66 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.