Easy games for the Jays, they just need to win, every, single, game, forever.

So you're telling me there's a chance?

You're telling me there's not?

Just dropping in after a long hiatus. Wondering, is maintaining RickyRo on the global banner a cruel joke, or a realistic emblem of the Jays' predicament?

Once upon a time, RR was very good. His fall from grace was immense, and no one knows what he might yet be. Until the stud Pitcher's arrival to dethrone him, he might as well stay.

or

Change occurs on this site at an extinct snail's pace, so that might be the reason.

Has anyone counted how many games lost because starters can't get past 6.0 IP? Or wins, if Gibbons pulls them sooner?

I think it's enough to be solidly in First Place.

I have no numbers, but it seems like the bullpen hasn't been very good at keeping inherited runners from scoring and Gibby rarely pulls the starter at the start of an inning.

The bullpen was a strength last year but has been mediocre this year. Ideally, Loup shouldn't be facing that many righties.  If brought at the right moment, instead of when the pitcher is in trouble, he'd have amazing numbers.

Good question that is easily checked.  Including tonights frustration the rate is 28% of inherited runners scoring (65 of 235).  Last year it was 26% (64 of 250).  Note how last year for the full season only 64 runners inherited scored, but this year we are now up to 65 inherited scoring with a month to go.  Clearly more runners are being inherited and a slightly higher percentage are scoring (using last years ratio it would be 60 scoring, 5 runs saved or equal to 1/2 a win).

Surprisingly our closer has inherited just 4 runners all year (perfect 4-0) as has Sanchez.  Delabar, surprisingly, was very good allowing just 3 of 20 to score.  Loup is now at 20% (59 chances by far the highest on the team).  McGowan also at 20% (35 chances).  Cecil & Jenkins at 25% (40 and 16 chances respectively).  The league average is allowing 28% to score.  Then there is a BIG jump to Redmond at 42% scoring (yikes, 19 runners on, 8 scored), and Santos at 47% (15 chances).  No one else has 10 runners.  Clearly Gibbons should never, ever, ever allow Santos or Redmond to come in with guys on.  JA Happ was nightmarish with 5 of 6 scoring btw, so even if we gave him 4 'freebies' to get him to 10 chances he'd be a horror too.

Pre-tonight the guys given high leverage (1.5 or higher when entering) were Loup & Cecil (over 20), McGowan, Janssen (in the teens), Delabar, Santos, Sanchez (over 5 chances each).

Guys who never saw a lead when they came in: Jeffress, Mills, Drabek, Korecky, Happ, and Tolleson.  Redmond is close with just 4 leads, 5 ties, and 28 times coming in when the Jays were losing.  Janssen, of course, is the opposite (30 leads, just 5 times behind) with McGowan next (21 leads, 9 trailing) then Cecil (30-19). 

Tells us a bit about how Gibbons is running the pen.  A shame I couldn't find a source with easy to get 'started inning when coming in' as that would be very interesting.  Could guess it from game logs but I do not have that much patience tonight.

Sigh... the Jays almost made it to September with staying in contention.  Needed a sweep this weekend to make it happen without a miracle and it isn't going to happen.  10 1/2 behind Baltimore so the AL East is gone now (sweep the 6 vs Baltimore and still would be 4 1/2 back).  6 1/2 behind the last wild card slot with the Yankees, Cleveland, and Seattle between the Jays and the current wild card team - Detroit.

July 3rd was the last day in first place, blowing a 6 game lead in under a month (444 win % in June, 577 in July, now a 292 in August or a 47 win pace over a full season...a 327 percentage is the lowest total the Jays ever had over a season). 
August 6th (I think) was the last day in the 2nd wild card slot.  The latest in a season the Jays have been in playoff position, I think, since 1993.

So some hope appeared and we did have a lot of fun dreaming during July and early August.  Then the injuries became too much and the offense went from #1 to #15. 

So mostly just more inherited runners. It makes sense with the way Dickey has fallen apart in late innings.

It seems it's time to focus on next year. Maybe try McGowan in the closer role, as I don't see Casey back.
Maybe shut down Hutch. Start pulling the starters early and let the expended bullpen carry the load. Maybe only bring Loup for an inning with 2 lefties up... etc.

I think the Jays need to man up and take seriously their role as spoiler this weekend. The Yankees have made the playoffs most years over the last two decades, while the Jays are 0-20 over that stretch (0-21, actually, and counting). It would be pretty sad if they let NY walk all over them en route to a WC spot in 2014 (this should be especially galling for the all-talk front office, which sat back and did nothing while the Yankees added several useful pieces at the July 31 deadline without giving up much in the way of prospects).

Agreed greenfrog ^^^^

I was at the game last night and I noticed that Pillar has zero walks so far this season. So I put up a poll about it.

Also EE looked terrible at the plate, his bat looked slow.

I think Hutch isn't ready to be shut down just yet...  5 IP 1 H 0 BB 7 SO on just 65 pitches.  Sweet.  Given the offense lately that is what it takes for the club to have a shot.

I was at the game last night and I noticed that Pillar has zero walks so far this season.

Baseball Prospectus used to hold an annual DiSar Awards contest (named after noted non-walker Gary DiSarcina). The objective was to name the player who would go the most at-bats into the season before drawing his first walk.

Who knew? Apparently BP still runs the contest, or at least did so as recently as 2013. (I don't read BP any more so had no idea.)

The linked article cites 1980's Rob Picciolo as the record holder for the most walkless PAs to start a season: 268. Given Picciolo's career walk rate (25 in 1720 PAs), the contest should have been named after him and not Gary DiSarcina.

Pillar has zero walks so far this season.

Here's the Zero that's really caught my attention. Opposing teams have yet to steal a base with Mark Buehrle on the mound. Which seemed mind-boggling to me - how often does a pitcher make 30+ starts and not allow a single stolen base? Turns out that it does happen. Just not very often. In the current century, it's been done by Kenny Rogers (Texas 2002) and Jon Niese (Mets 2010). No RH pitchers, although Chris Carpenter and Carlos Zambrano both came very close, and Yordano Ventura of the Royals has a chance to do it this year along with Buehrle. (So do Doug Fister and Hisashi Iwakuma but I don't think they'll make it to 30 starts.)

Sweet - Sanchez was 96-98 for every pitch but the curveball (83).  So a great game from Hutch (103 pitches, 7 IP 1 H 2 BB 9 SO) followed by a solid inning from Sanchez (2 K 1 ground out).  I hope Sanchez is left in rather than bringing in Janssen as I've lost all confidence in Janssen this month.

Hey, gotta like how they simply refuse to fall below .500. Baby steps!

Sweet.  2 IP for Sanchez, all but one pitch was a fastball 96-98, that curveball.  3 K's 3 ground outs.  What more can you ask? 

This is the Jays 3rd win when scoring 2 runs (3-10 when scoring twice).  Nice after losing 11-7 a few days ago.

Credit to Gibbons where it's due. Excellent decision to leave Sanchez in.

Magpie, I don't think anyone's yet attempted a straight steal against Buehrle.

Excellent decision to leave Sanchez in.

I think Janssen's performance of late made this an easy decision for Gibbons.

Next year, the Jays are going to have an outstanding defensive CFer. I don't know what his name is going to be but he is going to be a significant upgrade on this year.

I don't know what his name is going to be

He may have two names. And he may not hit very much.

Not even an attempted stolen base? Wonder if that's something that is considered for the Gold Glove.

So as far as we know Aaron Sanchez starts next year, with (unless traded): Drew Hutchison, Marcus Stroman, R.A. Dickey and Mark Buehrle.

Our biggest pitching issue occurs in the 7th inning, the Starter/Reliever interface where massive scoring occurs. Until this is solved, it matters little whether the offense is good, average or bad.

Gone are the days of the under two hour complete game start on 98 pitches. If the kids can go consistently 7.0 IP, and keep them older fellows to 6.0 IP, we might win huge numbers of games, regardless of the offense.

A.A. has more decisions this offseason than in all the others combined. Starting Pitching, Bullpen, Closer, Outfield, Infield, Catching and Bench just to name a few.

Interesting that a Giant broke the record for consecutive outs by a pitcher, because the record used to be held by a Giant, Jim Barr, for a long, long time. He set the record at 41 consecutive batters retired in 1972, and the record stood until 2007 when Bobby Jenks tied it, and then in 2009, when Buehrle broke it. Barr remains the only pitcher to retire 41 or more consecutive batters over a 2 game span. Buehrle did it over 3 games, and the other 2 over several games. Barr's streak extended from the 3rd inning of a complete game and then through the 7th inning of his next start. Not quite Johnny Vander Meer, but pretty impressive.

Here's the Zero that's really caught my attention.

Speaking of zeroes, the Angels used 8 pitchers to shut out the A's last night. I don't know for sure but would imagine that's a record.

I agree with others that say "you never know how a bull pen with the same main guys will do from one year to the next".
From last year to this year 1) Delabar- All Star? To minors. Why? 2) McGowan from nothing to something.

Pillar has zero walks so far this season.

I wonder how much of this is his fault. Is he swinging at a lot of bad pitches? Are pitchers just pounding the zone on him because they don't have a book on him yet? Are umpires not giving him borderline calls because he's a newbie?

Once upon a time, RR was very good. His fall from grace was immense, and no one knows what he might yet be.

Romero's problem was that he couldn't get left-handed hitters out. In 2011, his last good season, lefties hit .269/.372/.462 off him. (I think it was Joe Maddon who figured this out first.) He started getting hit, he tried to adjust, and he couldn't. It's a sad story. If he never makes it back, he will at least have the consolation of having had a major league career - including a trip to the All-Star game - and having been paid more than $28 million to play baseball. As a kid growing up, he would have settled for that.

Gone are the days of the under two hour complete game start on 98 pitches.

"Where have you gone, Roy Halladay? A nation turns its lonely eyes to you."

This is the point of the season where the Jays appear to be out of the playoff hunt and they go on a little streak to give us false hopes. I think the Jays rattle off at 10 game winning streak here. Then will lose the next 6...

Delabar was good in Seattle, late 2011 until trade in 2012. He was better in Toronto in 2012. And an All Star with great numbers in 2013. After the Break, he had two bad games in 8 appearances before going on the D.L. in early August (the 3rd?). Returning in September (2nd), he had two poor games in 9 appearances. He was still pretty effective. In 2014, it all changed, he was less than effective in everything he did. That's what I don't understand, because he's not that great in the minors. Does anyone know the underlying cause for this?

I disagree with McGowan from nothing to something. McGowan was always something special who could be more if healthy. Well, guess what, he's healthy and he's something special. Unfortunately his diabetes won't let him start. That's OK, a really good late inning reliever are an important asset too, especially one that could give you two inning spots.

Is he swinging at a lot of bad pitches? Are pitchers just pounding the zone on him because they don't have a book on him yet? Are umpires not giving him borderline calls because he's a newbie?

Mostly option two, I think. They don't have a book, and nothing they've heard has given them cause to be afraid. Plus... he's a bit of a hacker. He's hardly Damaso Garcia, but Pillar's played 411 minor league games and drawn 102 walks. Which is not very many.

#4, he likes to swing at pitches.

FanGraphs says that Pillar has seen 52% of pitches in the strike zone versus an MLB average of 49%. So he is seeing slightly more strikes than average. The problem is he's swinging at way too many pitches out of the zone (46% versus an MLB average of 31%) and, perhaps not surprisingly, making less contact on those pitches (59%) than average (66%). So he's not making very good contact, which is what he's been able to do in the minors. On pitches in the zone, he's right at the league average (about 87%).

It's actually mostly option 1. Swings at over 40% of pitches out of the strike zone vs league average 30% and misses on 10% more than the average hitter on those balls out of the zone. Basically swings like Vlad Guerrero, but doesn't make contact.

He's about average on swings, contact and % of pitches he gets in the strike zone.

Subjectively, I think he doesn't recognize good breaking stuff, which is often the cause of good minor league hitters becoming poor major league hitters.

A winning streak, finally, happens. Now to see if it becomes a big three gamer, or, shock, more.

Fun, fun win.  too perfect for Jeter to get the final at bat.  He had his flaws, but he's been one of my favourite players to watch as an adult. 

Great job by the Jays to compete and win the series this weekend.

The Jays have acquired John Mayberry Jr in exchange for Gustavo Pierre. I have no idea of the logic behind such a trade. Mayberry is a 30 year old right handed outfielder who is hitting .213 for Philadelphia. How does he compare to Nolan Reimold? What about Cole Gillespie who is hitting .346 in Buffalo on rehab?

Not that it makes a boatload of sense, but Pierre was pretty much a non-entity at this point. A 3rd baseman who can't hit and given his constant high error totals can't field either.

Mayberry is a 4th/5th OFer but he did have a good year in 2011 and is at least decent over his career against LHP (which if you have Gose as CF next year, you'll need someone to play against LHP)

Nice pick-up. Another lefty masher. He can help in September if nothing else.

vs. LHP:
this year: .255/.339/.582 -- wRC+ 155
career: .272/.323/..533 -- wRC+ 130

His overall numbers don't look very good this year but he's been hurt by a .233 BABIP (vs. career BABIP of .282), so could be a good rebound candidate. He's also increased his walk rate to a career high of 10.9 BB% this year.

Of course, that lefty-mashing thing only works if the manager sticks to it.

Colby Rasmus will be a Free Agent and gone soon. Melky Cabrera will be someone they will give a Qualifying Offer and really try to re-sign.

John Mayberry Jr is under control (three arby years) through 2017. He plays CF (141 G), LF (103 G), RF (83 G) and 1B (55 G) and hits lefties very well and righties, not so much.

So we need to ask, what does A.A. know that we don't.

With the team's budgetary constraints and difficulties attracting free agents to Toronto, AA may well be trying to cobble together a respectable team by filling holes with cheap players near their primes with strong platoon splits (Francisco, Valencia, Tolleson, Mayberry Jr.).

The next market inefficiency?

His overall numbers don't look very good this year but he's been hurt by a .233 BABIP (vs. career BABIP of .282), so could be a good rebound candidate. He's also increased his walk rate to a career high of 10.9 BB% this year.

The past two years Mayberry has been popping up at worse rates than Vernon Wells, and he doesn't run well and he hasn't been hitting many line drives, so you would expect him to have one of the lowest BABIPs in the league.  He has been truly atrocious against RHPs, popping up on about 30% of his FBs over the last two years.  He's no longer a good defensive outfielder, but as a platoon partner for Adam Lind, he should be fine. 

Mayberry is a good 4th OF/DH - can play all 3 outfield positions and 1B, can hit LHP which makes him useful with Lind on the team, could be in a platoon with Gose in CF if needed.  Basically an upgrade on Reimold who was limited defensively and still a wild card with the injuries.  Very low cost in non-prospect Gustavo Pierre whose highest OPS was 716 (A ball) and lifetime is a 660 OPS player.

Mayberry can no longer play centerfield.  He once could, but the wheels aren't there.  If you had no other choice, you'd be better to put him in right field and move Jose to center.  There really would be no excuse for that after September 1. 

Funny looking at his UZR figures.
RF: lifetime +8.4, this year just 27 innings (-39)
LF: lifetime -0.6, this year 93 innings (-0.1)
CF: lifetime -17.9, this year 81 innings (-0.9)
1B: lifetime -2.1, this year 72 2/3 innings (-2.9)

He has hopped around a lot but his best position he has played the least.  Kind of fits the Phillies it seems (misuse of assets).  Of course, in RF they have one of their few good players (Marlon Byrd, 36 years old 119 OPS+ but just 104 lifetime so I wouldn't bet on him next year). 

Odd to give up a 1/2 decent asset like Mayberry for virtually nothing (a low quality prospect) like the Phillies did.  They aren't exactly buried in quality players, nor are they fighting for anything this year so a guy who is 30 and still fairly cheap ($1.6 mil this year, arbitration 2015/16) is odd to let go.  I see him as perfect for a platoon with Lind or Gose, able to take over RF with Gose if the Jays go whole hog and shift EE to DH, Bautista to 1B and trade Lind while putting Pillar or Pompey in CF (don't see that as likely).  He could cover RF whenever Bautista has a break next year as well.

I like seeing stuff like this - marginal improvements to the roster at low cost.  I'd like major changes at times, but maybe more small ones are what this club really needs while waiting for some kids to develop or for an ideal big deal to arrive.

Well, the last time the Jays added a lefty masher who couldn't hit righties (Valencia), the manager decided to start playing him pretty regularly against righties, thus negating the value of the trade. In fact, I heard on the radio a couple of days ago that Gibbons said he intends to play Valencia MORE against righties than he has been doing. Given this usage of Valencia, I am greatly concerned that the manager will also use Mayberry against righties, in which case, this will be an extremely negative acquisition. Gibbons seems to get the concept that some left handed hitters can't hit lefties, but the concept that some right handed hitters can't hit right handers seems to be absent from his world view.

but the concept that some right handed hitters can't hit right handers seems to be absent from his world view.

I think it's more that he doesn't believe it counts unless it's happened before his own eyes. I doubt if he'd actually watched Valenica fail for a few years he'd be so willing to play him against righties.

I am greatly concerned that the manager will also use Mayberry against righties

Does this really seem likely? Whose ABs would he be taking? None of Cabrera, Bautista, Lind or Encarnacion are vulnerable.

I don't agree with Gibbons' decision to continue trotting Valencia out against RHP, but I can see his logic even if I don't agree with it. Francisco has stopped hitting so almost any warm body is, in his eyes, a better candidate to man 3B. And periodically that warm body will do things like hit a homerun off a RH reliever, and that will buy said warm body further playing time against RHP. We used to see that with Lind, when he'd get a hit or two against a lefty that would buy him extra opportunities.

Gibbons is a "hot hand" decision-maker, even if that only means looking as far back as yesterday to predict what will happen tomorrow.

I don't know, TUIB.  Gibbons does sometimes put a position player in the lineup for no discernible reason other than his previous success against the pitcher (which has occurred when Gibbons wasn't the manager).  I am pretty sure that he reads and accepts a stat line in this case.

I think that Gibbons is using Valencia more against RHPs now mostly because he is a better fielder than Francisco and Francisco is ice cold.  I hope that he realizes that this isn't a great option but may be as good as he has.

Coke to Chuck who said it better and quicker than I could. 

"Does this really seem likely?"

It seems quite possible to me. All it would take is an injury or two to a player who would normally hit against a RHP. At that point I expect we would hear the manager say that it was time to "see what he can do" against RHP.

Blue Jays Call-ups have started with Daniel Norris being called up.

Calling up Norris presumably has one or more of the following purposes:

- Provide additional bullpen depth to help the team finish as strong as possible (perhaps, among other reasons, to give the front office additional job security)

- See how close he is to being an ML pitcher next year

- Show the fans that there is promise for the future (message: even though, despite a huge marketing campaign and Beeston's comments about making the playoffs two or three times in five years, we missed the playoffs again this year, there are exciting players coming)

- Show the veterans on the team that there is promise for the future (i.e., to head off any discontent that might be mounting and keep the players motivated for 2015)

- Show ownership that there are good, cheap players on the horizon (i.e., that the front office is capable of fulfilling its mandate of winning relatively cheaply)

- Showcase Norris for potential trading partners

For Mayberry, who comes off the 40 man roster?
AA may not know precisely his budget for next year now. Maybe he finds out more after the season ends. Does it go up, down or stay the same? I think the final budget will not vary drastically from this year's budget. His future +/- acquisitions will be affected by this.
The 40 man roster has a long list of 4th/fringe outfielders and D Pompey still has to be added.
Buehrle, Dickey & Reyes if traded should fetch a lot IMO. This will also reduce the payroll substantially. BUT you may still want to compete. Is this current team competitive? Some say yes & others no.
Improving the team with acquisitions that produce is always good. The Buehrle acquisition was clearly good he produced well. JJ did not produce as hoped. The Jay's way of obtaining these players is to trade for them. You need a trading partner and the appropriate budget. We got that with the Marlins and the Mets.
This gave us a strong rotation for last year. JJ, Buehrle & Dickey were trade acquisitions which hit the budget and the farm system.It also cost us H Alvarez. Now adding what we already had in RR, Morrow & Happ gave us an incredible rotation.
Optimistic or pessimistic, take your pick about next years rotation. I see Hutch & Stroman in the rotation because I do not want them traded. I have not considered the 3 remaining rotation spots to start the 2015 season because I do not know for sure if any or all of our current guys will still be Jays. I love our 6th SP option... Sanchez, Nolin, Norris, Graveman and Jenkins. One of them can even be our 5th SP. So depending on who is in the other 2 spots to start the season, this rotation can be good. At the current health level we have the parts to put together a good rotation to start 2015. This is only speculation on my part about 2015 Opening day. So taking out Buehrle & Dickey and replacing them with new & cheaper acquisitions can still give us a strong 2015 opening day rotation. Buehrle & Dickey are good for sure but maybe not #1s.

Re: 40 man roster - looks like they outrighted Santos to AA.

I wonder if they'll bring up Pompey?

The obvious guys to drop off the 40 man are Matt Hague, Colt Hynes and Darin Mastroianni (Rob Rasmuessen would be another option.

Gose and Goins seem like the obvious position player call-ups once Buffalo's season ends today. For pitchers - Drabek, Delabar, Rasmeuseen and Nolin are on the 40 man roster right now.

Buehrle, Dickey & Reyes if traded should fetch a lot IMO.

I think these guys fetch a decent return only if Toronto picks up a portion of their remaining salaries. If Toronto moves them and their salaries in their entirety, the return won't be great at all, other than the upside of being freed from those salary commitments. Whether that's a positive in and of itself, I'll leave for others to debate.

Buerhle is owed 19MM in 2015. Dickey is guaranteed 13MM for 2015. Reyes is guaranteed 70MM for 2015-17.

Santos may or may not be anywhere, because the Minor Season is over, and he probably won't be called up.

It's much too early to consider bringing up Pompey, he need more playing time in AAA before he comes up. As he's still one year away from needing to be on the 40-Man, why rush it, it's a meaningless move.

Mayberry and Norris make the number 41. With Morrow most probably being activated from AAA after pitching later today in the last AAA game, the number will be 42.

AS to who gets waived, I don't know. But that more than two spaces will be needed, that I'm sure.

I think most managers manage with their eyes more than anything else. You spend your entire life hanging around ballparks watching guys play, you learn to believe in what you see. Even John Farrell, who came here advertised as a thoroughly modern man (in contrast to the old-school man he was replacing) had to actually see Octavio Dotel fail repeatedly against RH batters. There are different degrees of this, and most managers handle their hitters one way and their pitchers another. And there is no right or wrong way, not really. Well, Cito Gaston spent the mid-90s managing hitters with a sentimental heart and fond memories. That never works. But at least he always took a very cold and very sharp eye with his pitchers.

I actually think Gibbons tends to trust "the book" (his particular book, whatever it says) more than his eyes. However, I think this is far more true when it comes to handling pitchers. Which is odd for a former catcher, when you think about it. But with the hitters, he'll give stuff a look and see what happens. Let's see Adam Lind take a crack at LH pitching. It doesn't work? Fine, we're done. Let's see Valencia take a crack against RH pitching. And since coming here, Valencia's gone 13-48 against RHP (.271) with an enormous home run. Like everyone else, I doubt it will continue. But I don't know that Francisco would have done as much at this point.

There is the biggest reason Valencia is playing vs RHP - Francisco going 100% south.
Francisco's OPS by month, April to October is: 852-1013-587-851-392.  August was the only month without a home run.  I could see June as a 'balancing of odds' with May (817 OPS combined for May/June) as merged May/June is in line with his April/July production.  But August... oh my. 

I wonder if he might be starting to come back though... from August 1st to 16th he hit 061/114/091 (2 hits, 1 double in 33 PA).  From the 17th to 31st he hit 308/375/462 (4 for 16 2 doubles).  I strongly suspect he was hurt for the first part of August and he and the team hid it for some reason (probably due to the number of injuries and lack of options).  I wouldn't be surprised if he is now getting healthy and we see an 800 OPS in September from him.

Given how Francisco has been in August you can see why Valencia had so much playing time vs RHP.  He did hit 271/286/396 which isn't any great shakes but sure slaughters the 392 OPS in August Francisco had.

Mayberry is a different story.  We have LH hitters in Gose, Rasmus, and Lind who all need platoon partners.  We have everyday guys in Baustista and Cabrera and Encarnacion who play the primary positions for Mayberry.  So the only way he sees a lot of RH pitching is if someone is injured...maybe two or three guys.  Vanencia just needed Francisco to be unable to swing a bat as well as a pitcher does.  Tolleson going south also helped him get more time I'm sure too (Tolleson from July 12 to now has hit 143/189/143, for just August the OPS goes down to 274).

So for 2015 I suspect Valencia is the 2B/3B/1B backup, Tolleson is gone to AAA again, Francisco needs to be healthy to retain his spot, Mayberry is Lind's platoon partner, and we see Gose/Pillar in one of the OF slots (most likely CF) with Pompey chomping at the bit in AAA.  If needed we see Lawrie at 2B, Valencia/Francisco in a platoon at 3B, Mayberry/Lind at DH, Gose/Pillar in CF, and just a catcher left for the bench.  Better situation is Valencia with Lind at DH, Mayberry/Francisco find new homes and we get an everyday 2B and someone else who can play SS as the backup infielder (Goins maybe).

This year Gibbons has a challenge for September.  Try to sneak back into contention, get an idea about who to keep for 2015, and then if a miracle occurs figure out who to play where in October.

Let's see Adam Lind take a crack at LH pitching. It doesn't work? Fine, we're done.

I'd argue that the "fine, we're done" decision took much longer than absolutely necessary.

2013: 27% of PA are vs LHP; OPS 553
2014: 19% of PA are vs LHP; OPS 573
2015: 14% of PA are vs LHP; OPS 212

"....And since coming here, Valencia's gone 13-48 against RHP (.271) with an enormous home run....."

A number of people on this site said Gibbons was stupid and foolish for allowing Valencia to hit against RHP. They said it repeatedly, and they said it insistently.  Will those people now admit that Gibbons might have been right?  I doubt they will, but I'm posing the question anyway.

Of course this doesn't mean that Valencia will always hit RHP successfully in the future.  If Gibbons continues to put Valencia in the lineup against RHP, and he regresses to a horrible performance against RHP for a substantial number of games, then feel free to criticize the manager.  But couldn't we wait and judge by results, rather than judging on the basis of our own predictions?

I'm anticipating that those who predicted failure by Valencia against RHP are going to continue defending their prediction, by calling it a fluke or a coincidence or a meaninglessly small sample.  Perhaps, perhaps.  But the bottom line is that the critics were wrong, for those 48 plate appearances anyway.

And if people want to speculate that those 48 plate appearances were a mere fluke, I can fairly offer my own speculation that perhaps they weren't a fluke.  Perhaps Gibbons spotted something in his approach, or some previously unrecognized potential, or a shift in mechanics, or anything.  There are factors that go beyond a player's statistical history.  I don't think we should rely purely on career numbers to predict the future.  Gibbons might have had reasons for playing Valencia that we aren't fully aware of, and those reasons might have been right.

A good manager uses his eyes, his brain and his intuition.  He ought to know that Valencia has hit much more poorly against RHP than Francisco over their respective careers.  He can see that Valencia is a better fielder and that Francisco is in a horrific slump (one that has little to do with bad luck).  I understand why Gibbons has made the decision that he has in this case.  On the other hand, the Lind decision last year was inexplicable; one's eyes tell you that Lind looks absolutely horrid against LHP and the numbers tell you that your eyes aren't lyin'.  My sense is that Gibbons was acting in Lind's case on pure intuition- i.e. a hunch.  Doing that once or twice is fine (and human), but to carry on with it when it palpably isn't work sends a message to the players that you don't know what you are doing. 

Perhaps Gibbons spotted something in his approach, or some previously unrecognized potential, or a shift in mechanics, or anything.

Possible, although I think it's much more likely that he just decided to give the guy a chance. It's not like Francisco was doing anything with the bat, and he's not a guy you run out there for his defense.

I understand why managers always want to see things for themselves. But the eyes can deceive you, yours, mine and the manager's. Everyone's but Billy Martin's, in fact. And while Gaston had comparatively sharp eyes when it came to pitchers, he was most adept at spotting weaknesses; things that a) could be exploited or b) meant it was time to throw this pitcher on the scrap heap. I don't think he was particularly gifted at spotting talent, his record with young pitchers notwithstanding.

Maybe that's just me. But if you go by the Eye Test, Jim Rice was the greatest hitter who ever lived. I'm not kidding. And the most impressive pitcher you could ever hope to see, by a mile, was A.J. Burnett.

The Jays hold club options on 6 players and the Manager.

Should the Jays pick up the following options?:

Gibbons - I don't expect AA to be fired so Gibbons should be back. I'm not the biggest fan of Gibbons but I'm willing to give him one more season to turn things around.

Morrow (10m) - Easy No

Santos (6m) - Easy No

Lind (7.5m) - Easy Yes

Happ (6.7m) - Happ is a below average starter on the wrong side of 30. I would only pick up this option if I had a trade lined up with another team that wanted Happ at this price. The Jays are deep in starting pitching (even without Happ, the Jays will have Sanchez, Norris, Nolin, and Graveman fighting for the 5th spot during Spring Training.)

Thole (1.75m) - Somebody has to catch Dickey, so this will be a yes

McGowan (4m) - I think most Jays fans will say yes but I say no. For a team that will likely have little money to spend on upgrading the roster, I wouldn't want to waste 4 million on a injury prone middle reliever.

You can get a lot of productive relief pitchers for less than 4 million. This season, the best free agent relief signing was Pat Neshek. The Card signed him to a minor league contract with a payday of 1 million if he made the major league roster. Here are other examples of good free agent signings this season:

Tony Sipp - Minor League Contract
Francisco Rodriguez - 1yr/3.25m
Wesley Wright - 1yr/1.425m
Jason Frasor - 1yr/1.75m

Despite the fact the Jays bullpen has been bad 4 out of the past 5 years, I still don't believe in spending a lot of money for this group. I also don't believe any reliever should get more than a 1 year deal unless you're a special talent like Mo Rivera or Craig Kimbrel.

"Doing that once or twice is fine (and human), but to carry on with it when it palpably isn't work sends a message to the players that you don't know what you are doing."

Mike, does it really? I'm sure some players are sabermetrically inclined, but most I think are not. Zaun a week or so ago was still espousing the need for Lind to be playing every day, and I bet more than a few players agree with Zaun that if Gibbons showed enough faith in Lind to play him everyday, he would produce.

No kidding, Magpie. 

Yesterday, we were driving home from Montreal beginning at about 1:30.  TSN Montreal radio carries the Jay games (but not really as an advertised affiliate- the game was described as "MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL featuring the toronto blue jays".  It was a very satisfying game to listen to particularly when Tolleson caught Jeter's little pop to end the game just before we got to Brockville with the station coming in loud and clear.  There are no affiliates in Eastern Ontario save for Peterborough.  I suppose that modern man has his smart phone tuned to mlb.com and doesn't worry about such things.

I suppose you might be right, hypobole.  I would have thought that what with all the shifting and charts and such, most players would be well aware of platoon issues, particularly ones that are easily visible.  Zaun is, I think, quite old school compared with the average player in the clubhouse today. 

Unless a player is a 100% recovered at the August deadline for setting Postseason Rosters, it's better keeping them on the D.L. Dan Johnson, Brett Lawrie and Brandon Morrow start September 1 on the DL, thus increasing Toronto's Postseason Roster to 28 players. So it all depends on who needs to come off when.

Happ (6.7m) - Happ is a below average starter on the wrong side of 30. I would only pick up this option if I had a trade lined up with another team that wanted Happ at this price. The Jays are deep in starting pitching (even without Happ, the Jays will have Sanchez, Norris, Nolin, and Graveman fighting for the 5th spot during Spring Training.)

I agree with you on all fronts but this one Ron.  I'd give you ten to one odds that Happ is back.  6.7 million for a solid number 5 is money well spent in this day and age.  there's no such thing as a bad one year contract, right? 

I'm torn on McGowan for the same reason. 

speaking of the ease of assembling a quality bullpen, just look at Cleveland with Crocket and Allen both dominating from out of nowhere.

Crocket was a pure reliever out of college, a fourth round pick in 2013 who allowed all of 7 runs over 1.5 seasons in the minors before getting called up.  college relievers who can fast track like this seem like a majorly undervalued asset.

Cody Allen, drafted in the 23rd round in 2011, is another example - a dominant reliever for 2 years for the Indians, he allowed 19 runs in 98 minor league innings before making the bigs in 2012. 

we could be several wins ahead right now if we had these kind of minor league relief gems, at very little cost to our farm team.

With the options my view is...
Easy no: Morrow, Santos - any GM who picks up those options better be ready to go job hunting shortly after
Easy yes: Lind, Happ - Lind if healthy is easily worth the $6.5 mil difference between buyout ($1 mil) and using the option ($7.5).  Happ is a $6.5 mil decision ($200k buyout or $6.7 mil option) - he is a decent starter who is probably worth $6 mil a year so a slight overpay but not enough to worry about and odds are you could find a taker for him fairly quickly.

Sort of yes: McGowan - $3.5 mil decision (500k buyout vs $4 mil salary) 3.16 ERA in pen, 7.5 K/9 vs 3.4 BB/9.  The Jays have invested a lot in him over the years, do they cut him now?  I doubt it - I suspect they renegotiate with him to make it a 2 year deal for $4 mil or something.  A 2000 draft pick, compensation for losing Graeme Lloyd, who came over to the Jays as part of the Roger Clemens deal. I love seeing that Roger Clemens is still paying dividends to the Jays in 2014.  Also, just because many relievers can be had cheap doesn't mean they will be effective.

Conditional yes: Thole - $1.75 mil, can't find the dollar amount, he is in arbitration if option declined.  The Jays keep him if they keep Dickey, if Dickey is traded Thole goes with him.

Not too many hard choices there.  I suspect AA is working on trades involving Happ or Buehrle or Dickey already (will trade one of the 3) and would like to trade Lind and find a full-time 1B so Encarnacion could move to DH full time.  McGowan will be negotiated with (ala Kawasaki last winter) and might be allowed to go to free agency. 

Lots depends on how AA sees the pen and rotation I suspect.  The pen will have Cecil, Loup, Redmond, Jenkins, Drabek I suspect with others like McGowan. Morrow, and Santos being possibilities if they stay (at lower prices).  I expect a pile of cheap options to be signed (again) to try to fill it in  ala Wagner & Perez a year ago.  Rasmussen and Delabar will fight to make it as well.  Is there a need for McGowan? No. But he is a nice to have guy.  The more I think about it though the less I see that option being picked up.

There are no affiliates in Eastern Ontario save for Peterborough.

Ottawa 1310 carrries all games. It's owned by Rogers Communications.

I still don't get that about Zaun. If he were to analyze his own play the way he does for others, he never should've had a major league career. He didn't hit for power or average and was terrible defensively because he couldn't throw out base stealers.

Zaun must be awfully confused about how he himself managed to stick in the majors as long as he did without any appreciable old school skills.

"....Happ is a below average starter on the wrong side of 30. I would only pick up this option if I had a trade lined up with another team that wanted Happ at this price. The Jays are deep in starting pitching...."

I don't think Happ is below-average for a 5th starter.  And he has performed better than some highly-touted free agents such as Ubaldo Jimenez and Ricky Nolasco.  I think his option will be picked up, regardless of trade.  In fact, if there is a trade, the Jays might prefer to trade Buehrle or Dickey because of their much higher salaries.  I think Happ will be kept because the Jays will need pitching depth, despite all the prospects who are knocking at the door.  You can't rely on good seasons in 2015 from young kids like Sanchez, Stroman, Norris or Graveman.  It might happen (especially in the case of Stroman and Sanchez who now have MLB success to build upon), but you just can't rely on it.  You can't assume it will happen.  So you need depth, and Happ is the easiest and cheapest way to keep a reliable starter around.   If you dump Happ, you would probably need to acquire another veteran as depth, in case Norris and Sanchez aren't quite ready yet.  And most veterans, especially the free agents, are expensive.  Happ is much cheaper, and more reliable (as a 5th starter).

A number of people on this site said Gibbons was stupid and foolish for allowing Valencia to hit against RHP. They said it repeatedly, and they said it insistently.  Will those people now admit that Gibbons might have been right?  I doubt they will, but I'm posing the question anyway.

No. I won't let 48 at-bats render the previous 815 at-bats versus righties meaningless. Maybe Gibbons did magically fix something in Valencia's swing, but let's just say I am skeptical that Valencia can keep up the .362 BABIP he's had with the Jays (vs. lefties and righties). If you can show me something that he is specifically doing different from his time with the Royals or Twins, I could be convinced that this is the real Valencia, but I just won't be swayed from my opinion that Gibbons was stupid and foolish (I believe I used the word "dumb" to describe it) for allowing Valencia to hit against RHP over Francisco based on what might be the best run of Valencia's career and what probably is the worst run of Francisco's career. In September, I would expect Francisco to hit better versus RHP than Valencia.

"....I won't let 48 at-bats render the previous 815 at-bats versus righties meaningless..."

I never said the previous 815 at-bats were "meaningless."  Everything has to be factored into the equation, and of course his career numbers have to be considered.  Everything has some meaning.  I just said that you shouldn't call Gibbons "dumb" for playing Valencia against RHP.  He's not a "dumb" manager, and it's actually irrational to attribute his decisions to stupidity or lack of intelligence.  He undoubtedly had his reasons for his decision, even if you disagree with those reasons.  And the actual results of the 48 plate appearances does not suggest that Gibbons was "dumb."  So why are you insisting on sticking to such an insulting characterization of his decision-making process?

"....Let's just say I am skeptical that Valencia can keep up the .362 BABIP he's had with the Jays (vs. lefties and righties)...."

Skepticism is fine.  But that's different from saying that Gibbons is stupid.

"....I could be convinced that this is the real Valencia..."

Again, nobody said that this is necessarily the "real Valencia."  My argument was simply that Gibbons wasn't necessarily stupid for his decision about those 48 plate appearances that he gave to Valencia.

"....In September, I would expect Francisco to hit better versus RHP than Valencia..."

Having been proven wrong in your August prediction, you've gone double-or-nothing with your September prediction.  Okay, we'll see.  But even if you're right in September, you'll still be 1-and-1 overall.

Jerjapan – I do believe there is such a thing as a bad one year contract. We have a lot of bad one year free agent contracts this season. 7 of them signed for over 5 million.

I would classify the following as bad one year contracts:

Stephen Drew – 10.1 million
Mark Ellis – 5.25 million
Bruce Chen – 4.25 million
Jesse Crain – 3.25 million
Scott Downs – 4 million
Rafael Furcal – 3 million
Dan Haren – 10 million
Corey Hart – 6 million
Josh Johnson – 8 million
Kendrys Morales – 6 million
Chris Young – 7.25 million

Now regarding the Happ discussion, I think there may be other pitchers available around his option price. I’m looking at guys like Josh Beckett and Jorge De La Rosa. Depending on the medical reports, Brett Anderson probably wouldn’t cost more than 4 million in base salary on a 1 year deal. AA might check on him again this off-season. Aaron Harang has been a huge bargain for the Braves this season. He signed a minor league contract worth 1 million if he made the Braves roster.

The Jays are likely going to working with a limited budget. The 6.7 million might be better spent elsewhere on the roster while hoping one of the younger pitchers steps up next season. If I was in charge of the Jays, I would still decline this offer unless I had a trade planned out.

Having been proven wrong in your August prediction, you've gone double-or-nothing with your September prediction.  Okay, we'll see.  But even if you're right in September, you'll still be 1-and-1 overall.

I'm fully accepting that I could be wrong in September. I've been wrong before, and I'll be wrong again in the future. Unless something dramatic happens (an injury or identifiable mechanical adjustment), I'll still argue that Francisco will be better against righties in 2015 and beyond than Valencia. It worked in August, yes, but I don't think it tells us much of what might happen in September and beyond.

You are absolutely correct to say that I shouldn't say that Gibbons is stupid or dumb based on this decision. If I had re-read what I had written, I would have altered that so it would have said that I think Gibbons used a dumb process to arrive at the decision to use Valencia more than Francisco against righties, which is what I have said in the past. I'm sticking with characterizing the decision-making process as dumb because it is dumb. Just because a bad process produces a good result doesn't mean that the process wasn't flawed or that the process will continue to produce good results. There is a large body of evidence that Francisco is better against RHP in his career than Valencia, just like we have overwhelming evidence that Adam Lind just can't hit lefties. If Gibbons thinks that because he is hitting so well against righties (and he is), maybe he can hit lefties now, which is what has happened in each of the last few seasons under Farrell and Gibbons, it's still a dumb process. If Lind goes on a tear in September and crushes lefties, that doesn't suddenly mean that the process was a good one.

If Gibbons continues to put Valencia in the lineup against RHP, and he regresses to a horrible performance against RHP for a substantial number of games, then feel free to criticize the manager.  But couldn't we wait and judge by results, rather than judging on the basis of our own predictions?

If I have ample evidence that something probably isn't going to work out, I'm going to say 'I think that this probably isn't going to work out.' I'm not going to wait until after it doesn't work out to say 'I knew that this wasn't going to work out.'

"..... Just because a bad process produces a good result doesn't mean that the process wasn't flawed or that the process will continue to produce good results...."

This is what people always say when their predictions are wrong.  Translation:  the process must have been "flawed" because it wasn't the process that I would have used, even though the process actually produced a good result.  And what is the proof that the process was "flawed"?  Not the results, because the results were fine.  There is no objective proof, so we are told to accept the subjective opinion that the process was flawed.

The reality is that we don't know the process that Gibbons used, and we don't know if he'll continue to use the same process in the future.  It's rather over-confident to declare it a "flawed" process without knowing any details of the process or the factors that entered into the process.  It would certainly be a flawed process if Gibbons decided to ignore all the evidence and all the career numbers and just whimsically play Valencia against RHP on the basis of some obscure hunch.  But why should we believe that that's what the process consisted of?

More likely, the Gibbons decision-making process included a whole array of factors.  Some of them have already been mentioned by other people in this thread:  the disastrous slump in Francisco's hitting, and the fact that Valencia is a superior defensive player compared to Francisco.  There may have been other factors too:  the game situation, the opposition pitcher, the availability or unavailability of other players, or some hitting adjustment that Valencia has made, or other factors.  The point is:  a bunch of these factors were involved in the process, and it's irrational to attack the process if we don't know the exact factors that Gibbons considered.  He hasn't said what factors were involved, and it's a bit presumptuous of us to assume that we know the process that he followed in his thinking.

That doesn't mean that I'm rejecting the right of criticism.  Feel free to express skepticism or disagreement with the decisions, but I think it's unfair to call it a "dumb" process.  Unless you're able to read the manager's mind telepathically.

In all honesty Ron, I see very few of those as bad contracts.  Drew said no to a qualifying offer, and his agent is Scott Boras, who has made a career of making players a lot of money.  getting him for 10 million makes enough sense that the Sox signed him and the Yanks traded for him - both smart front offices. 

many, many posters round here wanted Ellis. 

likewise, a lot of Bauxites wanted JJ to get a qualifying offer. 

Bruce Chen has been undervalued for years with KC.  this year, finally, he's too old.  but he's generated a lot of value on a lot of one year contracts. 

maybe haren, young and morales were bad moves. 

Valencia now has a career OPS vs righties of .617, in approx 1,000 AB's. That's a pretty big sample size. If he has an OPS of .682 in 48 AB's or whatever it is vs righties as a Blue Jay, so what? That's not much different from his career OPS vs righties, and is well within the bounds of statistical variation, and besides, it's still not very good. Juan Francisco's career OPS vs righties is .791, again in almost 1,000 AB's. The logical assessment of the situation is that Francisco will hit for an OPS of approx 170 points higher than Valencia (.791 vs .617). That doesn't mean that in any small sample size Valencia can't outhit Francisco vs righties, but you have no way of predicting when that might happen over a 30 or 40 or 50 AB,(etc.) stretch. Now, if the manager thinks that Valencia's better defense at 3B is more valuable than 170 points of OPS, well that's his decision, but expecting Valencia to OUTHIT Francisco vs righties doesn't make sense, and is not going to happen over the long haul.

If somebody says to me, Dan, I'm going to roll 2 dice, and I'll pay you $1,000 if your number comes up - you can have number 3 or number 7. It would be a bad decision for me to pick 3, because there are only 2 ways to roll a 3 (2-1, 1-2), whereas there are 6 ways to roll a 7 (6-1, 5-2, 4-3, 3-4, 2-5, 1-6). However, sometimes 3 WILL come up. If I pick 3 and it comes up, it doesn't mean I made the right decision, it means I got lucky. The right decision is to pick 7.

Dan, that's a purely statistical argument.  Baseball, in the real world, is about more than purely statistics.  Just to give one scenario (of many possible scenarios):  what if Gibbons was aware of some external factor that was likely to reduce Francisco's hitting ability in August?  A lingering (unreported) injury, for example, or a personal issue, or an attitude problem, or an off-field problem?   What if he noticed an improvement or adjustment in Valencia that isn't yet reflected in his career numbers?  We've all seen examples of players who begin to out-perform their career averages, even at a relatively late stage in their career.  I won't compare Valencia to a Bautista or an Encarnacion, because obviously he's nowhere near their level, but I mention those two examples just to illustrate my point that a veteran hitter isn't a prisoner of his career averages.  On a smaller scale:  look at how J. A. Happ's pitching velocity suddenly seemed to increase substantially this season. That wasn't predictable from his career numbers.  Bottom line:  if Valencia outperformed Francisco in August, you can't declare that "luck" is the only conceivable explanation.

Just to update the 40-man roster debate: since Santos has been outrighted to AA, and Wagner has been DFA'd, by my count there are 38 players on the 40-man roster, even with Mayberry now on it.   So this leaves room for 2 players to be added for September.  Norris is one of them. Morrow, presumably, is the other.  (He is currently on the 60-day disabled list, so I believe he has to be added to the 40-man roster when he is promoted.)  If the Jays want to add another non-roster player, such as Kottaras or Graveman or both, the team could easily drop someone else from the 40-man roster:  perhaps Hynes or Hague or Mastroianni.

That still leaves plenty of room for the Jays to promote a bunch of players who are already on the 40-man roster, if they choose to do so.  The fairly obvious candidates are Gose, Goins, Rasmussen and Jenkins.  Other possibilities are less certain, but could include any of Nolin, Delabar, Jimenez, Drabek and Johnson.  They're all on the 40-man already.

jerjapan - When talking about bad 1 year contracts, I'm not judging them if they were bad contracts at the time they were signed. I'm judging by the results produced this season.

"Lind (7.5m) - Easy Yes"

Have we learned nothing yet about Adam Lind? I remember early in the season when Lind got off to a terrific start and all the chest thumping started about how obvious it was that the Jays should have picked up Lind's option, all while ignoring what the premise of the let-Lind-go camp was saying. Well, here where we are in September, and as Adam Lind himself said, the Jays are in their usual spot. Lind is still a platoon hitter with no defensive or baserunning value who can't stay healthy. He has a whopping total of 4 HR and 29 RBI, with 3 RBI since June 26th. Lind is a nice piece for the right roster, but at some point this organization needs to realize that 7.5m on a platoon DH who can't stay healthy is not money well spent under their payroll parameters that require the players passing around a hat in the clubhouse to collect $ to add talent.

Jimenez is a lock for promotion, assuming health, strictly by the fact he's a catcher.

Bruce Chen has career earnings of about $20.5 MM, $14.0 MM of which KC paid him.

It's possible Bartolo Colon turns into a fence post next year, someone will remark about the "bad" contract he signed.

When someone talks about there's no such thing as a bad one-year contract, how much is spent is immaterial, it's how long you are being punished for a bad decision that matters. If the signee performs, you receive fair to great value and a chance to re-sign him. If not, you can wash your hands of it at season's end.

"what if Gibbons was aware of some external factor that was likely to reduce Francisco's hitting ability in August?"

Well, there is no evidence that this was the case. In the absence of any such confounding factor, the statistical analysis of what a player has done over a large sample size is the best indicator of future performance, keeping age related decline in mind. It is highly likely that over the next couple of years, say, that Francisco will post a considerably better OPS vs right handed pitchers than Valencia. If his glove doesn't cost him a mlb job, of course.

"and all the chest thumping"

Lind has a 134 wRC+ this year. That's excellent. As far as playing time goes, I don't see how Lind can be faulted for fracturing his foot on a foul ball. And to the extent that his back injury also flared up this season (a much less significant injury in terms of time missed), you could argue that it may have resulted because Gibbons overused him (riding the hot hand plus "needing" Lind's bat in the lineup because the Jays never added enough roster depth.

Had Lind been used properly this year, and had he not suffered a fluke foot injury, he likely would have been well worth the relatively insignificant one-year commitment he commanded.

In any event, Lind is not the reason the Jays are playing .500 ball this year.

Lind has been worth $5.5M to the Jays so far this year, according to FanGraphs. So 92-93 does raise a good point. I mean, I don't think there's any way they turn down Lind's option, but it is a closer call than you might expect.

Not the results, because the results were fine.

Well, first of all, the results (if I'm reading the earlier comments correctly) are an OBP of .296 and a SLG of .396. And with a high BABIP. As mentioned, that's not particularly good and it's also within range of what we'd expect. ChinaFan, you seem conflicted by your own understanding that this is a small sample and your eagerness to lord it over others by imbuing it with so much meaning. Things like this:

They said it repeatedly, and they said it insistently. Will those people now admit that Gibbons might have been right?"?

46 PA!! You really should've waited. If Valencia can hit righties well -- which, again, he isn't yet -- over a few hundred at-bats, I'd be happy to admit that Gibbons was right. And I don't discount the possibility that they might be able to tinker with him and make him improve. But I suspect that's what every manager/hitting coach thinks. It's an arrogance that gets in the way of good decision-making -- they think they can succeed where everyone else failed. And so they discount the track record. Wasn't Seitzer going to turn Goins into a good hitter over the off-season? On the Baseball Prospectus podcast, they picked up on that storyline -- they follow one such example every year -- as a test of how much we should believe coaches when they think they can make drastic changes. Well, it didn't work, and it usually doesn't.

A better hitter was what he was going to make Goins into, and that's what Goins has been, a better hitter. He might get good, but that might take more time. With his defense, it really shouldn't matter.

"....If Valencia can hit righties well -- which, again, he isn't yet -- over a few hundred at-bats, I'd be happy to admit that Gibbons was right...."

But that wasn't my argument at all.  I never said that Valencia will hit righties well for the rest of his career.  I stated the issue very clearly:  the issue was the specific games in August, and which hitter to put in the lineup in those specific games.  Some fans insisted that Gibbons was "dumb" for playing Valencia ahead of Francisco in specific games against specific pitchers in August.  That wasn't a sample size of 48 ABs; that was a sample size of 3 or 4 ABs in a single game (or fewer than that if a RHP starter is replaced by a LHP reliever).  For a whole host of reasons (which could have included a Francisco injury or some other factor that we're unaware of), Gibbons decided that Valencia was a better choice than Francisco for those specific games in August.  People said was dumb; I'm saying that (for those games) he was right.  Results proved it.  

People said was dumb; I'm saying that (for those games) he was right. Results proved it.

No. As Dan Gordon already explained, a good result doesn't mean a good decision. If a guy drinks 20 beers at the bar, drives home, and arrives safely, are you going to say, "People said it was dumb. I'm saying that (for those nights) he was right"? I've used this example, by the way, since you seem to think a demonstration of logic (as in Dan Gordon's dice example) can be dismissed as mere statistics if it includes numbers. Oh wait... I did use a number! Please change "20 beers" to "a whole lot of beer."

Results proved it.

And even if you want to focus the argument on results, you still don't have the case you started off thinking you did. Results proved it? What, pray tell, would Juan Francisco have hit had he played instead of Valencia? That would be the relevant comparison. Well, we don't know, but we do know that in his career (the best sample size we can get), Francisco's got much better numbers vs. righties than Valencia has of late.

As I said, though, focusing on the results of a meaningless sample is silly. The one point you've got is when you focus on process. To wit, if Juan Francisco is injured then Gibbons has had a perfectly sensible reason to play Valencia and all criticism can be retracted. But he's not on the DL, he continues to play (including the field) occasionally, and Gibbons has offered a different explanation for why he's playing Valencia. So I doubt it's the case but it's a fair point. Always is in these cases.

Tangled, I'm not disputing that Lind's fWAR total isn't particularly impressive this year. My point is that he has hit very well when he's been healthy, and that the main reason he's missed so much time is a fluke injury.

Before his foot injury, he was raking. Had he stayed reasonably healthy from that point forward (perhaps with a brief stint or two for his back issues) he likely would have been a very valuable asset this year, making his one-year contract (with further team-friendly one-year options) for 2014 well worth picking up.

Now, is his 2015 option also worth picking up? Maybe. He's moving further past his prime and his injury history is getting longer.

You can't really look at picking up Lind's option in isolation. Encarnacion, Bautista and even Cabrera are more valuable as DH's than fielders. Pompey, Gose and Pillar are better defensive outfielders than Bautista or Cabrera. You have to have a whole team view before you consider whether to bring back Lind. You have to think about, "is Cabrera coming back?" and "what are next year's plans for Bautista and Eddie?" And while I am at it, the Mayberry pick up, just baffles me.

Lots of balls in the air for the Jays right now, and even more in the offseason.  Right now I'm thinking AA is building up assets again and getting ready for whatever the market is come November. 

Gone almost for certain: Morrow, Rasmus, Janssen
Likely gone: Cabrera (unless QO made and he takes it), McGowan (low odds of option, might stay vs going elsewhere due to history)
Maybe trade-able: Lind, one of Dickey/Buehrle/Happ
Maybe released: Santos, Romero (if Jays just sick to death of him...might hold on minor league roster to use as salary relief in a trade)

A massive list of others could be added, but those are the guys who either had an impact on the team results or on the team payroll who I see as strong possibilities of leaving.  So that covers 2 OF, closer, a starter, DH and a couple of 'thought they would be something' guys (Morrow, Santos).  I suspect trading a starting pitcher will help fill one hole, Gose/Pillar/Pompey will cover one of the OF holes, I think we have plenty of guys to cover the pen (plus AA will invite 1001 guys to spring to try out I'm sure), leaving DH and an OF slot.  That is where Mayberry fits in - he could help cover one of those if needed, or just be a platoon partner at one of those two slots as a 'plan B'.

We don't know what the budget for 2015 will be, who will be here (for certain) and what deals AA knows can be made with contenders once the season is over (sometimes short term they want certain guys but once the offseason hits they can think long term again and deals might be 1/2 set now but cannot be completed until after the World Series).  I figure the Jays can sign one of Cabrera/Rasmus and maybe Janssen if they want to without blowing their budget (I'd expect a 10% increase for 2015, but there are plenty of raises to make it tough).  If a new home for Buehrle can be found then $19 mil is freed up to use, $12.5 mil if a new home for Dickey is found, $6.7 for Happ.  It is up to Sanchez and the other kids to force the Jays hand this winter.

"....What, pray tell, would Juan Francisco have hit had he played instead of Valencia? That would be the relevant comparison...."

This is precisely my point.  Any reasonable person, looking at Francisco's horrendous numbers in August, would have to conclude that Francisco would have done worse than Valencia if he had received those 48 hypothetical plate appearances. 

Surely, with the benefit of hindsight, it's now perfectly clear that those 48 plate appearances should have gone to Valencia, rather than Francisco.  And that's what Gibbons correctly decided to do.  Unless you think that Francisco would have magically done far better in those 48 hypothetical appearances than he did in his actual 51 appearances (in which he managed an OPS of .392).

John Mayberry Jr. was acquired to be Adam Lind's platoon partner because he hits well, what Adam doesn't. John is 2nd Arby for next year and not a Free Agent until the end of 2016 Season. He can play all the OF positions, so he's very valuable going forward.

Adam Lind does well enough to get his option picked up, and until A.A. can replace Adam with better, expect him back.