Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
Where is that sweet spot for wins and crowds? What should Rogers be shooting for?

IMO no one at Rogers still thinks 78-84 wins is a good way to go forward as I'm sure they've done a deeper analysis than I'm doing below. We don't have easy access to TV ratings (that I know of) but we do for attendance.

Attendance (seasonal)
90+ wins: 3,355,006 (6 seasons)
80-89 wins: 2,389,355 (17 seasons)
70-79 wins: 2,056,171 (9 seasons)
60-69 wins: 1,650,184 (2 seasons)

Remove the pre-Dome years and you get... 90's: 3,720,671 (4 seasons) 80's: 2,425,227 (13 seasons) 70's: 2,153,695 (8 seasons) 60's: 1,900,041 (1 seasons)

Remove the 1990's (dome new still)
90s: 2,794,891 (1 season)
80s: 2,183,225 (9 seasons)
70s: 2,013,448 (6 seasons)
60s: 1,900,041 (1 season)

I see a pretty clear line in the sand there. Winning in the 60's to 89 (can be decent, but not 'wow') and you get around 2 million fans. Crack 90 though and you get from just shy of 3 mil to 3.7 million fans depending where you draw the line for time frame. Remember this year was 89 wins and so was 1989 (first year dome existed) both years with over 3 million. Shift it to 85 and up and 75-85 for wins and you get...

86+: 2,945,395 (13 seasons)
75-85: 2,126,170 (15 seasons)

86+: 2,829,734 (3 seasons)
75-85: 1,952,304 (10 seasons)

I think I see a strong sign there. being in that 75-85 win range is not really any better than being in the 60's but crack 85 and things get a lot more interesting.

As to TV I found via Forbes that the Jays had over 1 million viewers per game on average this year, a 12% increase from last year's 901k per game which was then a record for the network (Sportsnet). I guarantee that Rogers wants to see that continue. The World Cup of hockey which Canada won only averaged 329k per game as a comparison. Another comparison point is via The Star and we see 2013 with great hope at the start of the year the Jays had 540k viewers per game, up 7% from the previous year and up 25% from 2010. At the time of the article the Leafs (big money makers) averaged 700k viewers per game for a horrid product. Once the Jays were out of contention ratings dropped below 500k, to 437k per game.

Bottom line: unless the people running Rogers are idiots (and they aren't) or the Jays lose money even with the massive increase in audience size (unlikely) the Jays will have a bigger budget and a goal of 86+ wins this year.
Attendance vs Wins | 292 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
scottt - Saturday, November 05 2016 @ 11:38 AM EDT (#335052) #
It's fairly obvious that Jays fans want more than a winning team: 83+ wins.
They want to be in a pennant race all year. They want  playoffs baseball.
Canadian baseball fans are not all living close to Toronto.

Several years ago I was ordering food at the cafeteria at work, in Ottawa, and the cook was trying to make small talk with a guy wearing a Maple Leafs shirt. So he asked, "You like Toronto?" The guy became visibly upset and spat "Hell, no! I HATE Toronto." I exchanged a look with the cook and we both kept our mouth shut.

It's the same with the Jays. They have fans all over the country but it's easy for those to lose interest if the team isn't doing well.

jensan - Sunday, November 06 2016 @ 07:20 AM EST (#335070) #
Read an article on Fangraphs, this year dealing with projected Revenue for the present year of Regional TV Sharing pool.

When adding all teams projected revenue than dividing by 30 teams, the average revenue allocation by each team would be $51.6 MM usd.

That is a great deal of monies that each team on average allocates. I believe 34% is shared equally of this average by MLB on Regional Tv share pool or $17.2 MM.

Rogers indicates their allocation is based on the annual average, so that they do not have to pay more into the pool.

Though the Jays are a top 3 draw based on number of viewers, Rogers lowballs their figure. Rogers appreciates the value of their viewers through the increasing revenue from advertising and will allocate monies to increase their winning based on previous years successes and fan attendance.
bpoz - Sunday, November 06 2016 @ 09:21 AM EST (#335071) #
Rogers may appreciate the fans for their great support.

But how?

1) Reduce ticket prices.
2) More give aways at games.
3) Increased payroll. For a stronger team.
4)Other. They will probably do something.
5) All of the above.
6) None of the above.

Richard S.S. - Sunday, November 06 2016 @ 03:29 PM EST (#335075) #
2015 crushed all TV, Attendance and other records since the mid-90's. 2016 crushed all 2015 records. I find it hard to believe Rogers can't go to $175.0 - $180.0 Million for the Jays' Budget.
uglyone - Sunday, November 06 2016 @ 04:10 PM EST (#335076) #
I don’t know what the longterm average year plan needs to be but as for this offseason i think it would be ludicrous for them to do anything but go all in with a payroll knocking up against the top 5.

if they try and fail then the fans will understand when they strip it down and reset but not even trying right now i don't think would sit well with the audience
bpoz - Sunday, November 06 2016 @ 05:41 PM EST (#335079) #
I would like to know what the budget is. If we are simply estimating then the last 5 year budgets will most likely help produce the figure for 2017. Give or take 5%.
John Northey - Sunday, November 06 2016 @ 07:06 PM EST (#335080) #
1) reduce ticket prices would be a very dumb move as then ticket scalpers will eat up all the tickets and resell them at a big profit.

2) More give aways would be nice and might happen just because the value to companies giving stuff away is higher (Mr. Sub bag day-now more fans will hear and see it as an example)

3) This makes tons of sense - increased payroll increases the odds of a playoff appearance which makes more on its own, plus solidifying the fan base for the next bad period - see 1983-1993 the last winning streak (500+ every year and in contention most) - see 1994/1995/1996/1997 all with 2 1/2 million plus despite horrid teams, top 5 in the league for attendance. 1998-2006 were all 8th or worse for attendance and that was probably fans being too nice. Climbed back up to 6th in attendance (2.4 million) in 2008 as the team was trying to win with free agents (Ryan/Burnett/Thomas) and had Cito come back and put some life in the team. Then back to 8th and worse for a few years with low payrolls before jumping it in 2013 with tons of hope that flopped but the Jays have been top half since (7th or better, 1st this past year for the first time since 1994).

If the Jays management team cannot convince Rogers to up the payroll with this much evidence that increased payroll = more profit then there is no hope.

Now, if the front office cannot find a good investment this winter, then I can understand not blowing it in a desperate effort to spend for the sake of spending. Still, I see lots of good potential out there and hopefully they spend wisely. As a fan I'd rather see ticket prices go up than payroll go down.
Mike Green - Sunday, November 06 2016 @ 08:04 PM EST (#335082) #
According to BBRef, the Blue Jays final payroll for 2016 was $179 million.  The luxury tax threshold for 2016 was $189 million, and may or may not go up for 2017 depending on the CBA negotiations.  Their payroll certainly will be able to go up to $189 million, with a typical inflationary increase.  Currently, they have 9 players under contract (Donaldson, Tulo, Martin, Upton, Smoak, Happ, Estrada, Liriano, Grilli) for $110.5 million.  They have 5 arbitration-eligibles- Barney, Thole, Carrera, Loup and Colabello- who are not likely to add much to that figure, and a bunch of pre-arbs (Pillar, Goins, Sanchez, Osuna, Stroman, Schultz, Tepera, Barnes, Travis, Pompey and Biagini).  They've got money to spend for their needs, but some choices in terms of how to prioritize them.

As for the question, It seems clear to me that it is unrealistic to expect to be in contention almost every year in this division.  You want to have a target of 86-92 wins most years, with the understanding that some years things just won't work out due to injuries and other years, you will be trying to rebuild.  On the other hand, prolonged periods of mediocrity (or worse) are not good for a baseball franchise in Canada.  I don't think Rogers will see it that way either.

John Northey - Sunday, November 06 2016 @ 08:18 PM EST (#335083) #
Rogers needs to keep investing in the Jays as watching games in Seattle you can see the Jays fans are big coast to coast which is great for their TV ratings/ad revenues. Ideally they invest heavily in kids and in improving the minors/amateur scouting like AA had started to do since the return on investment seems quite high from that (better trades, better drafting, better odds of a player developing).

As to the BR payroll that is not the best method. I use Cot's for payroll where the Jays started at $137 million this year, and have just $110 committed for next year thanks to $12 mil from San Diego to pay for most of Upton's contract (I added in Grilli as his option was picked up). Barney is on his 3rd year of arbitration, Loup his 2nd, Stroman & Carerra their first, while Colabello is listed as non-arbitration and Thole will be released if he hasn't already.

I don't see more than $10 mil being added via guys here already so $120 mil total. That leaves $17 mil vs last years starting point, probably a lot more than that vs what 2017's starting point will be.
bpoz - Sunday, November 06 2016 @ 08:54 PM EST (#335084) #
The Cost of EE and Bautista was low at the 2016 starting point for payroll.

But how did we get to $179 mil for the final 2016 cost?
ComebyDeanChance - Sunday, November 06 2016 @ 09:40 PM EST (#335085) #
Scott Kazmir elects not to opt out of his contract with the Dodgers, joining James "Big Fly" Shields this offseason in those electing to stay put.
John Northey - Sunday, November 06 2016 @ 09:41 PM EST (#335086) #
Checking BR they didn't factor in partial seasons or cash back it seems.
For 2016...
Liriano $13.67 mil
Upton $15.45 mil
Feldman $8 mil
Benoit $8 mil
Total: $45.12 mil

In all of those cases the Jays paid less than half of that. Benoit breaks even as he was traded for Drew Storen with the salaries adjusted to break even for both teams (one bad contract for another basically, but dang did it work nice for the Jays).

It'll be interesting to see final totals when the luxury tax details come out. I suspect the Jays will end up in the $150-160 range (factoring in all 40 man roster partial seasons and full etc).
John Northey - Sunday, November 06 2016 @ 09:47 PM EST (#335088) #
Kazmir not a shock. Owed $17.7 mil each of the next 2 seasons after a 85 ERA+ this year in 26 starts. Dodgers look like they made a bit of a mistake there, glad the Jays didn't do that deal.

Jamie Shields had his first sub 200 IP season since 2006, a 69 ERA+ and 19 losses just to add to the misery. His FIP was 6.01, his HR/9 was his worst ever, his BB/9 was his worst ever, his K/9 tied for worst in his career. He is owed $21 mil a year for the next 2 years (San Diego paying $11 mil of that each year, White Sox pay the rest) plus a $2 mil buyout for 2019. Ugh.

Those 2 show the danger of signing solid pitchers to long term deals and why a player option doesn't always work in the teams favor (like many assume Price's will for Boston).
ComebyDeanChance - Sunday, November 06 2016 @ 10:05 PM EST (#335089) #
Luxury tax is calculated on more than annual team salary. "Payrolls are for 40-man rosters and include averages of multiyear contracts; health and pension benefits; clubs medical costs; insurance; workman's compensation, payroll, unemployment and Social Security taxes; spring training allowances; meal and tip money; All-Star game expenses; travel and moving expenses; postseason pay; and college scholarships."

Salaries for players on long-term contracts are calculated on AAV, so Martin for example, costs $17 million rather than $15.
bpoz - Sunday, November 06 2016 @ 10:40 PM EST (#335090) #
Thanks for the financial information, with the details.

Major league baseball is a business. A big business.
dan gordon - Monday, November 07 2016 @ 12:27 AM EST (#335091) #
The correct number for the Jays' 2016 payroll for the season is $159.4 million according to spotrac, which breaks down each player by the length of time they were with the organization, and what they earned during that time. That put them 11th, $4.2 million behind Washington. There were 7 teams above $180 million, and then a bit of a gap down to Texas in 8th at $168.4 million. The Jays should at least move up above the Texas number, maybe $175 million. That would leave them about $55-60 million to address the LF,RF,1B,DH issues and add a couple of bullpen arms.

One thing about the spotrac numbers is they included $5 million for Upton in the 2016 salary total. The trade stipulated that Toronto was to pay $5 million out of the total he had left on his contract. They've put all of that into 2016, and I would think that's probably not exactly right. If it was actually $2.5 million each year in 2016 and 2017, for instance, then reduce the Jays' 2016 number to $156.9 million.
uglyone - Monday, November 07 2016 @ 01:19 AM EST (#335092) #
yeah spotrac is the new gold standard for contract and payroll info.

but Dean makes a key points about luxury tax:

- miscellaneous costs of about $10-15m must be tacked onto mlb player salaries to calculate total payroll in regards to the tax threshold
- multi year contracts are calculated using Average Annual Value (AAV), not that year's actual salary. (I'm pretty sure all bonuses are spread over the term as well)
jensan - Monday, November 07 2016 @ 07:57 AM EST (#335096) #
50% of medical and dental expenses have been covered by 50% of the fines of exceeding the salary cap, specifically the Dodgers and the Yankees at varying rates.

For example if the fines for exceeding the cap total $100 MM for 2016, 50% of the fines or $50 MM would be divided equally for teams not exceeding the cap and under the CBA must be used for paying team health and life benefits.
Mike Green - Monday, November 07 2016 @ 08:35 AM EST (#335098) #
Salaries for players on long-term contracts are calculated on AAV, so Martin for example, costs $17 million rather than $15.

Good points, but it's a complicated story.  In 2017, the AAV works to the club's advantage vis a vis the luxury tax.  Martin's 2017 salary is $20 million, and Tulowitzki's AAV is lower than his actual 2017 salary (as are Happ's, Estrada's and Upton's).

I agree that Sportrac is the better source because of its handling of players traded during the season and players on the disabled list.  Using the Sportrac figures, the Blue Jays can afford to add about $20 million in payroll easily without running into luxury tax issues- even if the limit is not increased in the new CBA.  There is no reason for the club to be significantly under the threshold.  They do have a useful farm system at this point, but most of the players require significant development time, and the fans have supported the team as you would anticipate a large market team would (allowing the club the luxury to develop talent patiently). 
jerjapan - Monday, November 07 2016 @ 09:14 AM EST (#335101) #
Good points all around, and I hadn't realized that the tax was calculated based on the AAV of the contract. 

I also agree with those saying there is no reason for us not to be in the Texas-realm salary-wise.  close to but under the luxury tax seems the perfect range for us given our huge fan support the past two years.  We could go even higher I'm sure, but one step at a time.  I will be fine with this offseason, even if we don't resign EE, as long as salary goes up a reasonable amount and we are making the same sort of shrewd moves that we made the past few offseasons.  at this point, EE seems like a value move IMO, but I certainly understand the arguments against resigning him.

I'm also fine with player opt-outs, reasonably done.  Kazmir and Shields don't really impact my views on the idea - Price is a much different player, and the whole point of these opt-outs is risk management and resource maximization.  You win some of those moves, and you lose some.  I still believe the Sox AND Price will come out of his deal as big winners.  

AWeb - Monday, November 07 2016 @ 11:39 AM EST (#335107) #
Is anyone hearing anything about the new CBA? It would be surprising to me if the luxury tax threshold wasn't pushed upwards, but I think it stayed put last time. It really started as a "c'mon, Yankees, stop it" tax, when they pushed their already league-leading salary total from 92 million in 2000, to 205 million in 2005. They could try the same now with the Dodgers (almost tripled their payroll in four years, $272 million now) and bump it way up to $250 million or so. Would likely get increase overall spending, so maybe owners wouldn't want that?

I hope/think the luxury tax threshold is a likely high-end ceiling for Jays payroll, as it probably is for the multiple teams within a major signing of it.
John Northey - Monday, November 07 2016 @ 01:32 PM EST (#335112) #
Lets look at last years closing payrolls.

$200+ million: 4 teams - LA ($267), NYY ($226), Boston ($215), Detroit ($205). One of these things is not like the others.

$180s: Cubs, Giants, Angels - all big markets

$157-169: Texas, St Louis, Washington, Toronto, Baltimore

$140's: Seattle, Mets, KC, White Sox

Then we go to the 120's and so on to

Sub $100 (aka cheapskates)
Oakland, Miami, Milwaukee, Tampa Bay (dead last as per their usual, $5 mil lower than anyone else).

Some pretty clear groupings there. Jays are in a medium market group there who are all in contention. I can't imagine anyone would say Detroit should be able to spend more than the Jays outside of the fact their owner is a very old man who wants a title. Given the Jays TV ratings slaughter everyone else in baseball (from what I've read it seems to be about double the viewers of anyone else) there is no reason they couldn't be up in the $200 mil range in theory. I'd be happy though if they climbed into the 2nd tier with the Cubs/Giants/Angels.
uglyone - Monday, November 07 2016 @ 02:15 PM EST (#335113) #
Edwin camp starting bid: 5yrs x $25m

sounds about right for a starting bid.
John Northey - Monday, November 07 2016 @ 03:11 PM EST (#335114) #
In a very, very weak free agent year he probably will get it. Looking at a MLB article on the top 25 free agents I see very little that jumps out. None project to have 4 WAR in 2017, just 3 are at the 3 WAR level and 7 at the 2 which is the cut off for regulars and starting pitchers. Only 20 with a projected 1.0 WAR in 2017 (Saunders at 0.8, Bautista 1.6, Encarnacion 3.2). So teams looking for an impact player are very limited in free agency. This is a good winter for sellers looking to stock up on kids.
scottt - Tuesday, November 08 2016 @ 06:50 AM EST (#335124) #
It's maybe not that weak for DH types and Encarnation still has negative defensive value and cost a draft pick.

I see overpay for Hill, Chapman, Cespedes, etc..
Fowler? Had a great year, but only played 125 games. The Cubs had a losing record without him.
I don't think he'll end up with much over the QO, but can certainly get 3 years easily.
Same deal with Desmond. He could be an attractive super utility guy but worth losing a pick?

jerjapan - Tuesday, November 08 2016 @ 07:03 AM EST (#335126) #
I like the idea of Desmond as a super utility guy - he's a better backup for Travis if injuries continue to plague him, and he could play a lot of OF to replace Saunders - or let Bautista DH (crosses fingers). We wouldn't need him in CF where he graded out -0.8 defensive runs per Fangraphs. 

He's got a good glove at SS and is a quality baserunner, but someone will want him as a SS most likely?  I'd sacrifice a draft pick for him - perhaps that keeps his demands manageable? 
bpoz - Tuesday, November 08 2016 @ 08:51 AM EST (#335127) #
Those are good payroll categories John N.

The Jays bumped payroll for 2013. This brought us into a higher category. Did we go up 1 or 2 categories.

The higher payroll was for better results. The FO did not produce the results and IMO that led to Beeston's departure.

We did get results in 2015 and 16. This justified the 2013 increase IMO.

Would payroll have decreased if no results had happened? Remember that AA improved the talent on July 31, 2015 by trading prospects. I believe that the Payroll did not go up very much for those acquisitions.

Then Shapkins added Happ and Estrada for $25 mil per year. But Bheurle came off the books.

I feel that there is something to this narrative. Mainly that ownership will only go so high in payroll to get the 90 or so wins to produce a pennant race in Sept.
AWeb - Tuesday, November 08 2016 @ 11:56 AM EST (#335131) #
Let's see how many expensive guys I can add to a theoretical payroll that could be available, and gut the remaining farm system while I'm at it:

Trade for Verlander (who has a no trade clause) - send back Alfrod? Only $28 million a year for three years.

Trade for Votto, take on full contract, send a prospect or two as filler, let's say Bichette and some random guy. 7 years, 172 million.

Sign Edwin (DH/1B with Votto) 5x$25

Trade for Stanton - too many years for all the money - send Urena back.

There, that's $110 million/year on those guys. Donaldson gets his too, let's say a 6 year, 180 million deal. Still need a LF - I guess I'm trading for Braun too. Keeping Pillar though, that defense will need a great CF.

Starting lineup of


That gets us to Dodger payroll territory...short window, but huge favourites next year right? I'm not even sure you could push the payroll this high if you wanted to without just giving extra money to guys for no reason. To avoid repeated luxury penalties, just Marlins it next year and give everyone away in a full prospect load-up rebuild. I think I like this plan actually, not my money!
Parker - Tuesday, November 08 2016 @ 01:35 PM EST (#335134) #
Add me to the "sign Desmond" camp. If Tulo gets hurt, SS is pretty much a disaster area. When Travis gets hurt, 2B takes a gigantic offensive hit based on existing internal options. If Pillar starts to decline defensively and continues to decline offensively, CF could get very ugly unless you have high hopes on a bounceback year from Upton, and he's not exactly a defensive standout in centre. Even so, the Jays are going to need someone else as well as Upton to man the corner outfield spots. Carrera isn't exactly a solid bet as a full-time player. I love Desmond as a Zobrist-lite type of player, though Desmond actually might somehow cost more than Zobrist.

Of course, if the Jays were to sign both Fowler and Reddick, it'd probably be smarter to stay away from Desmond. Fowler and Desmond, though, that'd be a great offseason haul, as long as the cost doesn't go way above what MLBTradeRumors is predicting. I can't really see it happening for the Jays, though.
PeterG - Tuesday, November 08 2016 @ 04:07 PM EST (#335137) #
Very much doubt that Jays will sign anyone with a QO.
uglyone - Tuesday, November 08 2016 @ 04:10 PM EST (#335138) #
desmond will get a starter's salary and cost a pick, and i'm not sure he's a dependable starter.
Parker - Tuesday, November 08 2016 @ 04:50 PM EST (#335140) #
The Jays can only lose one first-round pick. Never mind that Desmond can cover five different positions the Jays have no ML-calibre backups for.

And since the Jays' farm system is already in the top half of the Majors despite the farm 2015 farm sale, what do they need another first-round pick for, anyway? I thought "we" were supposed to compete now!
bpoz - Tuesday, November 08 2016 @ 05:01 PM EST (#335142) #
I like it AWeb. I know you are joking. Which is good. I thought something like this. An outfield of Bautista, Saunders and A Lind. Weak to no defense, would cost a ton of money but could Average 35 Hr.

We don't have to add pitching except maybe 2 arms in the pen.

This team should win 85+ games so we are in a pennant race.

Scores would be high due to unearned runs against.
SK in NJ - Wednesday, November 09 2016 @ 09:48 AM EST (#335159) #
I'm not a big fan of losing a pick for Desmond. He does bring versatility, but he's not the defensive player Zobrist is, nor the hitter. A slightly better than league average hitter who can cover a few positions is going to have value, but I'd have to think pretty hard with the pick attached. Depends on the cost/term.
uglyone - Wednesday, November 09 2016 @ 12:57 PM EST (#335160) #
projections don't even think he's a great bet to be an above average hitter.
John Northey - Wednesday, November 09 2016 @ 04:06 PM EST (#335162) #
Desmond holds no interest for me. He is a guy who can play CF/LF/SS/RF/2B and probably could play 3B or 1B as well but unless he is at SS or 2B his bat isn't good enough and to be in CF he'd have to field almost as well as Pillar. His lifetime OPS+ is 100 and 2013 is the last time he was over 110 (113) with a 125 the year before (ages 26/27, the traditional peak) otherwise as a regular he is as likely to be in the 80's as at 100.
Richard S.S. - Wednesday, November 09 2016 @ 05:49 PM EST (#335164) #
Starters (no openings): Sanchez, Stroman, Happ, Estrada, Liriano: $44.697 Million.
Bullpen (three openings): Osuna, Biagini, Grilli, Loup: $5.26 Million.
Infield (two openings): Travis, Tulowitzki, Donaldson, Martin: $57.53 Million.
Outfield (two openings): Pillar: $.53 Million.
Bench (one opening): Upton JR, Smoak, Barney: $10.125 Million.
Fillings Holes as cheaply as reasonable(eight openings): Tepera (RP), Schultz (RP), Barnes (RP), Colabello (DH), Carrera (OF), Pompey (OF), Goins (1B), Thole (C): $5.28 Million.
TOTAL: $$123.422 Million.
That's as about as cheap as it gets. When there is an upgrade in who fills the holes, or a surprise trade, totals will change. I just assume $30.0 - $40.0 Million will be available to do this.
SK in NJ - Wednesday, November 09 2016 @ 11:20 PM EST (#335169) #
Desmond simply isn't a good enough player to justify losing a pick, IMO. The price/term would have to be a steal for the Jays for that to make sense. Still a good player overall, but if the Jays are going to lose a pick, then they'll have to think bigger.

Howie Kendrick wants to be traded from the Dodgers. If you want a versatile player who is probably a ~100 wRC+ player and can "play" multiple positions, then he's a cheaper alternative to Desmond with only one year of control left. It shouldn't take much to get him either.

In other words, the Jays can do better than Desmond, especially if a pick is involved.
bpoz - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 08:05 AM EST (#335170) #
I heard on the Fan this morning that Bautista may accept the QO.

The thinking for accepting is 1 year to build up value with a good season. The thinking against is that he is now 36 years old. If he does not have that good season next year a 3-4 year big deal gets less likely.

They thought that the best thing for him was to take the long term contract now if someone will offer it. Not as much money as he would like, but the total would be more.

John Northey - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 08:39 AM EST (#335171) #
Sounds ideal for both Bautista and the Jays. A one year deal allows the prospects to keep growing and in a year the Jays will have a much better idea of where they are in the success cycle. Encarnacion could be resigned if Boston isn't interested. I'd hold to my guns if I was the Jays with him.
James W - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 09:36 AM EST (#335172) #
Encarnacion could be resigned if Boston isn't interested.

Boston doesn't get right of first refusal. Encarnacion is free to sign wherever he agrees to a deal, regardless of Boston's interest.
85bluejay - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 09:39 AM EST (#335173) #
It's not important to me if EE & JB (or any of their FA) return to the Jays - I will judge the offseason on how the FO fill their needs - I will be surprised if either EE or JB return and would be shocked if either accepted the QO.
SK in NJ - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 09:58 AM EST (#335174) #
I don't see Bautista accepting the QO at his age. Maybe if he was 30 instead of 36, but even if he came back to the Jays for a year and had a monster season at age 36, how long of a deal could he expect from age 37-onwards in the free agent market next winter? He can probably still get a solid 3 year offer somewhere right now given how bad the market is. If for some reason he can't, then coming back to the Jays on a short-term deal (1-2 years) might be his best option for many reasons, but he doesn't have to accept the QO for that. Test the market and see what happens, while keeping the Jays aware of his status is probably the best course he can take.
uglyone - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 10:16 AM EST (#335175) #
1. EE's agent says that Toronto is his #1 choice and does not have to be the highest bidder...but that he will hold out for that 5th year. (Note: the jays have no other contracts guaranteed for that 5th year (2021). his would be the only one.)

2. I actually could see Bautista takingn the QO, though I wouldn't count on it. But I don't see him getting a multi year contract with a higher AAV than his QO this offseason, and given his great confidence in himself I highly doubt he's worried that he wouldn't be able to get a similar amount next offseason, and definitely sees a chance of doing much better than that next offseason. But again, I wouldn't count on it.
85bluejay - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 10:38 AM EST (#335176) #
I know that Brett Anderson & Charlie Morton are injury plagued but I really like their groundball abilities paired with our infield defence - I would try to sign both & certainly listen on J. Happ coming off his great year.
Minnesota may have soured on John Ryan Murphy after his horrible 2016 - I like him as a bounce back candidate in the backup catcher role.
uglyone - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 11:37 AM EST (#335177) #
RA Dickey is officially an ex-Jay
#2JBrumfield - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 11:49 AM EST (#335178) #
Dickey is an Atlanta Brave. Good riddance!
BlueJayWay - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 11:50 AM EST (#335179) #
Which means Thole is soon to be an ex-Jay. Celebrate good times come on....
Richard S.S. - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 12:26 PM EST (#335180) #
I can see the Jays making one big Trade. I can see the Jays making one big Free Agent signing.

Right Field would be an opening for a big addition via Trade or Free Agency. I assume Melvin Upton JR., and Ezequiel Carrera share Left Field duties. Upton's Free Agency after this year means no one is blocked.
First Base will be a short term deal, with Rowdy Tellez on his way. D.H. might be kept open for either Bautista, Encarnacion or possibly Saunders returning. It can also be used to rest/give at bats to the Regulars. Backup Catcher won't be Matt Wieters.

The Bullpen is the only other place for a big Addition via Trade or Free Agency. With Joe Biagini Starting, this is a necessity. Needing three or four more quality arms makes this an ideal place.
vw_fan17 - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 12:36 PM EST (#335181) #
At the time, Dickey was an interesting trade/signing, and probably not too bad. If he'd had an ERA around 3.5, I think we could put up with Thole - especially the Thole that had recently been, just 1 year before we signed Dickey. The one that had had ~600 PA with an OPS around 700. That one would have been just fine as a general back-up catcher, even for non-knuckle duties. Alas, his best OPS here was below 600 - which was also the only time he broke 500.

At this point, ALL our other options are better than Dickey + Thole.

Vulg - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 12:38 PM EST (#335182) #
It's not important to me if EE & JB (or any of their FA) return to the Jays - I will judge the offseason on how the FO fill their needs - I will be surprised if either EE or JB return and would be shocked if either accepted the QO.

I agree with this. Shapkins has allocated the monies made available to them pretty effectively thus far. I don't really care whether the Prices, EEs or Joses specifically end up in Blue, but rather about the overall team budget and how the team's resources are deployed.

I think it was shameful that the team went into the 2016 with the 14th highest payroll in MLB, on the heels of great attendance and TV ratings and in what was supposed to be a contending year (they finished 11th). We'll see what the number is this time.

Shi Davidi has alluded that part of that equation seems to have been tied to Guy Lawrence's leadership. It'll be interesting to see how a Canadian executive (Joe Natale) steers the ship.
Parker - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 02:10 PM EST (#335183) #
I would've give up the pick for Desmond either, but if they sign a bigger free agent and the pick is gone either way, then I think he'd be a great pickup.

Honestly, it's amazing how many non-elite QO free agents are available. Fowler would be a great get if the draft pick loss is offset by at least one other signing. I'd be all for Fowler and Desmond, but if the Jays are giving up a pick, it's gotta be more than just one of these sorta good but not great players.
Parker - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 02:12 PM EST (#335184) #
Sorry, I meant to say that I WOULDN'T give up the pick just for Desmond.
Michael - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 02:37 PM EST (#335186) #
I agree that Bautista probably shouldn't take a QO, but if he is super confident in his own skills, he would get a better deal next year if he has an excellent year next year. But if he has only an OK or bad year, he'd lose a lot.

Wonder if EE would take a 5/100 offer. I think 4/80 is fair, 5/100 is the same AAV but one more year so not as good a deal for the team, but probably in the right ball park. 5/90 would be a no brainer, IMO. The 5/125 number tossed around is clearly too high.
John Northey - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 03:23 PM EST (#335187) #
All this talk about not losing the draft pick. What is the pick for 2017 likely to be? The Jays had the 7th best record which translates into the 24th pick overall depending how many teams that did worse lose a pick. If 5 lose a pick (that would be high imo) then the Jays would climb to 19th, lets be silly and imagine they climb 10 slots to 14th.

Pick # and all time WAR (BR style)
14th: 2 over 30, 5 more in the 20's, 6 in the 10's, 10 in single digits, 12 negative, 17 did not reach (including the last 5 and 6 of the last 7)

19th: 1 over 100 (Roger Clemens), 1 over 30 (Bobby Grich over 70), 3 in the 20's, 1 in the 10's, 19 in single digits, 14 negative, 14 did not reach.

24th: 0 over 30, 2 in the 20's, 4 in the 10's, 13 in single digits, 10 negative, 23 did not reach the majors.

So from this you can see there is a (very) slim shot at a inner circle HOF'er, 25 who had 10+ WAR (so probably produce more than most free agents will) out of over 150 players drafted in those 3 slots. So yeah, the pick could be valuable but odds are strong that it won't produce as much as a 'meh' free agent would. There is a slim shot at a superstar though.
uglyone - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 03:31 PM EST (#335188) #
no problem with losing the pick, but not for a guy who's not even a clearcut starter.
greenfrog - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 03:57 PM EST (#335189) #
I still think the Jays should sign Rich Hill. This would give them an excellent and balanced rotation (Sanchez, Stroman, Estrada, Happ, Hill) and allow them to slot Liriano in as the #6 starter who can also pitch out of the 'pen. It would also give the Jays extra rotation depth for 2018.
John Northey - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 04:02 PM EST (#335190) #
I'd agree on that. Will be interesting to see how many guys take the QO this year.
John Northey - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 04:05 PM EST (#335191) #
Rumours are interesting.

Seems Mets are interested in Bautista if Cespedes leaves. That might be a good route for the Jays, sign Cespedes and lose Bautista to the Mets. Get a slightly lower pick and get a much younger player (entering age 31 season, so a 5 year deal hits age 35 and he'd still be younger than Bautista).
Parker - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 06:27 PM EST (#335198) #
I dunno about Hill. He's probably going to get at least two years, maybe three, and he doesn't have much of a track record. He's also got some durability concerns. And there's no way he's signing for less than $15M a year... 2/34 or 3/45 or thereabouts. On the other hand, the Jays have had some amazing results with "risky" SP contracts in the last year, though. I trust their judgment, but honestly I have more faith in Liriano as the 5th starter with Biagini as the sixth man.

It really depends what else they can do with the money, though. Hill is very tempting. He's just... so risky.
greenfrog - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 06:50 PM EST (#335199) #
The question marks surrounding Hill are exactly why the Jays should sign him. He's a high-risk, high-reward free agent that could really pay off. His age, lack of a lengthy track record and blister issues are going to keep his price tag down. At this stage, the Jays don't need an innings-eater like Dickey. They should be aiming to dominate their opponents with top-notch pitching and defense (and offense, if they can manage that too). The Jays have enough cash to take some intelligent risks.

Hill has been worth 4.9 fWAR over his last 139.1 innings. Even if he misses a dozen or so starts next year, there is a good chance he'll be elite over his remaining starts, including, potentially, in the playoffs.

Meanwhile, Liriano pitched 163 innings this year and generated 0.4 WAR. And yes, WAR is an imperfect measure, but Liriano seems better suited to being a #6. And at some point someone (perhaps multiple someones) will get injured. Liriano would likely still end up starting some games, even with Hill signing with the Jays.

Of course, Hill would only be a good risk below a certain price point, and there is a good chance that the winning bid for him will exceed that price point.
Richard S.S. - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 06:55 PM EST (#335200) #
When do Q.O. decisions, accepting or declining, need to be made?
scottt - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 06:57 PM EST (#335201) #
Hill will be 37 and has 24 starts in the last 6 years.

You could get Benoit back for half the price of Hill if you have money to burn.

There are suitors for Bautista, but I'm guessing they are offering 2 years top and about the same money as the QO because of the cost of losing a pick. 

Reddick is still the best fit for the outfield and he wouldn't cost that much.

Sean Rodriguez is another half decent super utility guy.
Is Goins out of options now?

uglyone - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 07:00 PM EST (#335202) #
Sean Rodriguez is a guy we should have got back in the liriano deal instead of one of those prospects.
Richard S.S. - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 07:23 PM EST (#335203) #
The Jays have zero need for Starting Pitching this year, especially with Joe Biagini getting stretched out in Spring Training. The following year, that might be different.

In 2015 Regular Season, in 2015 Postseason and in the 2016 Regular Season the Bullpen was a problem. The current Bullpen has Roberto Osuna (21), Jason Grilli (40), and five openings. The Jays have been there/done that and not good enough being as all that's is available.

Any money spent this Offseason needs to go to the Bullpen first.
vw_fan17 - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 07:31 PM EST (#335204) #
Meanwhile, Liriano pitched 163 innings this year and generated 0.4 WAR.

It seems a little disingenuous to leave out that he was -0.4 over 113 innings for the Pirates, and +0.7 over 49 innings with the Jays. If you work that out over a season (say 200 innings), that's 2.8 WAR, maybe even 3.0. Sure, that's probably wishful thinking. However, IMHO, so is hoping that Hill manages to pitch more than maybe 50 innings. Hill's been in the majors for 12 seasons, and only twice has broken 100 IP, one of which was last season. His ONLY other seasons of more than 60 IP were 2006 (99.1) and 2007 (195.0).

This will probably be his last contract, and he's essentially had ONE "wow" season - last year. Someone will overpay for that.
greenfrog - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 09:06 PM EST (#335205) #
I know the conventional view is that the Jays rotation is all set for next year. I disagree on this point. I think people have a natural tendency to think of a rotation as five pitchers. The Jays have a pretty good starting five, so what's the issue? I prefer to look eight deep, not five deep (look at what happened to Cleveland and the Mets this year). In any case, abundance is better than scarcity - you can always trade from a surplus.

I don't expect to persuade anyone on this issue. I just like to put my comments on the record (as when I suggested that Happ might end up being the bargain off the off-season, or when I predicted that Sanchez would outpitch Stroman this year).
uglyone - Thursday, November 10 2016 @ 10:17 PM EST (#335206) #
sure, but what does that mean for player moves, aside from picking up more floyd/chavez/feldman/biagini types?
greenfrog - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 08:03 AM EST (#335208) #
I think spending a lot on free agent bullpen arms is generally a bad idea (there are exceptions, as in the case of Miller a couple of years ago). And spending a huge amount on an aging DH/1B/corner OF type probably isn't the best investment, either. How much value did the OI's get from O'Day (4/$31m) and Davis (7/$161m) last year?
greenfrog - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 08:49 AM EST (#335209) #
Incidentally, Dave Cameron just posted his top 50 free agent list. Here is his writeup for Hill (#8):

No one knew what to do with Rich Hill last year, coming off four crazy great starts in September but with no track record of success. Now, he’s added 23 more terrific starts to his resume, but he’s still a pretty big lottery ticket. Hill will turn 37 next year, so even if he had a long career as a healthy workhorse, we’d think there were health concerns, but Hill has spent most of the last decade on and off the DL, so any potential buyer has to consider how much they’ll pay for a completely unknown number of innings during the duration of his next contract. But the upside is obviously tantalizing, and teams with cash to spend in the short term should be looking at Hill as the kind of high-upside play that could make a huge impact without putting their organization at risk long term. Roughly $50 million feels like the right price for this kind of risk/reward proposition; the question will be whether it gets spread over two years or three.
uglyone - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 10:42 AM EST (#335210) #
still not sure where yoi're going with this....are we putting a $15m starter in the bullpen as insurance? or sending stroman to the minors?
greenfrog - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 11:18 AM EST (#335211) #
When you consider AAV and future contractual obligations, the Jays have a dirt-cheap rotation. But they have no quality depth beyond Liriano, unless you think that Biagini would make a good starting pitcher (which would end up subtracting from the bullpen). Adding Hill (at, say, 3/$50m) would not move the needle much in terms of the team's overall financial commitments. But it would result in a much better rotation depth chart, and add a potential difference-maker to the roster.

And it's not either/or. Assuming everyone is healthy to start the season, Liriano can start out in the bullpen as a useful lefty on a one-year contract. He can join the rotation later in the season when someone gets injured or has other issues.
bpoz - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 11:37 AM EST (#335212) #
GM meetings are over.

I like what the Braves have done. Colon and Dickey are 2 innings eaters that are on affordable 1 year deals.
J Teheran is young and very good. They probably have a few more SPs that could be acceptable.
One more reasonably good SP gives them a pretty good rotation.

It is not easy to get a good SP like the Jays got last year in Happ and Estrada. Everyone wants SPs.

The Jays can dangle Happ and Estrada and see what is offered. Trade 1 if it makes sense. Both are coming of great years and are very cheap for what they delivered. Since I don't believe that they can repeat that performance in 2017 I say to trade 1.

JD, Travis, Tulo and Martin cannot carry the offense IMO. I fully expect help to be acquired. Usually everything is done by the end of the year. So we will know in the next few weeks.
bpoz - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 11:51 AM EST (#335213) #
I am quite sure that Shapkins believe in depth insurance. So I expect the 6th SP option to be revealed soon.

I don't believe that he will be from last years rotation.

Liriano will only go to the pen if he plays badly enough. The clubhouse will be upset if a veteran is put in the pen for no other reason than SP insurance. All IMO.

Prior to 2016 the Jays always were short of SP insurance IMO. I only see #8 option coming from the farm. But you never know.
SK in NJ - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 12:03 PM EST (#335214) #
Starters like Liriano are usually in MLB rotations, not the back of the pen. The swing man role is an ideal spot to hide pitchers that can spot start and are out of options (like Hendriks in 2015, and possibly Bolsinger in 2017). Liriano is actually an MLB starter and makes a lot of money for one year.

My thing has always been to have prospects in AAA to serve as depth. In some cases they might win rotation spots out of Spring Training (Sanchez) or stay in AAA in case of need (Hutchison), but the Jays don't have any pitching prospects pegged for AAA in 2017. Since they are set with their five MLB starters and lack the depth outside of that, then it makes far more sense to allocate resources to depth than to bump an expensive MLB starter to a swing man role and overpay for a starter in the free agent market. The only way signing Hill would make sense is if they had a cheap young starter that they could have optioned to AAA to serve as depth, but I don't see them demoting Stroman or Sanchez, so the fit isn't there.

I don't think anyone will disagree that adding a a strong SP would help. Of course it would, but you have to look at the roster, then the payroll, and figure out the best use of resources. Right now the Jays need a DH, LF, and RF, and could certainly use an upgrade over Smoak at 1B. The resources need to be focused a lot on the position player side.
uglyone - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 12:05 PM EST (#335215) #
I mean we all want SP insurance but I just don't see how putting a $13m SP like Liriano in the bullpen is efficient roster building. And while SP insurance is great, even teams with good depth just don't have guys with Liriano's track record as their #6 SP. Maybe the dodgers with their $300m payroll. That's a bit too much to ask imo.

I would expect us to pick up a few arms like feldman floyd chavez types with plenty of SP experience but whose contracts fit into a middle relief role as well.
Richard S.S. - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 12:42 PM EST (#335216) #
I thought the Jays were done "dumpster-diving". Most of the top GMs realize solving problems starts at the top of the food chain. They go young with extreme upside or older with extreme talent.

Despite the perceived need by some people, there are other pressing needs. If a Starting Pitchers is what the Jays needs get someone to pitch with Sanchez, someone with extreme talent or upside. Verlander and Sale are said to be available and might fill the need. The Jays need to be looking at this talent level.

Richard S.S. - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 12:44 PM EST (#335217) #
Not wanting to spend money on Relievers is understandable when you are not dealing with the best (like Ryan, O'Day). I would throw money and term at Aroldis Chapman until he signed (remember Miller). He's the best Pitcher on the Market, left-handed, without Q.O. and young. The next best LHP is Brett Cecil and everyone else is not as good. The Jays cannot miss out here.

Richard S.S. - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 12:49 PM EST (#335218) #
Waiting for Encarnacion or Bautista is foolish if other needs are not priority. Both can be DH if necessary. Saunders can wait. Future 1B is Rowdy Tellez so care must be taking in who gets signed. Upton JR. and Carrera are Free Agents long before Anthony Alford arrives. Dalton Pompey isn't good enough to block anyone. Seeking a long-term solution is now a priority.

Sign Chapman ($12.5 - $15.0 per/ 5-6 years); sign/acquire OF stud ($15.0 - $20.0 per/4-6 years); wait for Encarnacion or Bautista or Saunders; then fill-in with what's left, it shouldn't be that hard.
JB21 - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 01:03 PM EST (#335219) #
Jays signed Cuban Lourdes Gurriel Jr to a multi-year deal. 21 y/o that played LF, SS, 2B, & 3B last year for the Industriales. He hit 344/407/560 in 59 games.
SK in NJ - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 01:09 PM EST (#335220) #
Jays have signed Lourdes Gurriel Jr to a 7 year, $22M deal, according to Joel Sherman.
Glevin - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 01:10 PM EST (#335221) #
I like the Gurrriel signing. One of the best international free agents and could be not that far away from the majors.
uglyone - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 01:11 PM EST (#335222) #
looks like Gurriel is actually 23 last month.
SK in NJ - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 01:13 PM EST (#335224) #

"The Blue Jays have agreed to a multi-year contract with Cuban infield prospect Lourdes Gurriel Jr., reports’s Jesse Sanchez (via Twitter). Gurriel, the younger brother of Astros infielder Yulieski Gurriel, is considered one of the top available international prospects and will receive a seven-year, $22MM contract from the Jays, according to Joel Sherman of the New York Post (Twitter link).

Gurriel was declared a free agent several months ago but waited to sign until after the completion of his 23rd birthday in order to be exempt from international spending limitations. Unlike his older brother, he’ll require some more time in the minor leagues before surfacing at the big league level. Gurriel is a career .277/.362/.426 hitter in Cuba and slashed an outstanding .344/.407/.560 in 245 plate appearances in his final season in Cuba — the 2015-16 campaign."
Cracka - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 01:16 PM EST (#335225) #
Copying from the other thread:
From (

"Scouting grades: Hit: 55 | Power: 50 | Run: 50 | Arm: 55 | Field: 60

Gurriel was once considered the top prospect in Cuba, and now he's making his way toward fulfilling his big league dream. Gurriel was hitting .321 with eight home runs, 32 RBIs and a .924 OPS in 43 games for the Havana Industriales this season before defecting with his brother in February after the Caribbean Series in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic. A good runner with a good glove, Lourdes is athletic enough play infield and outfield, which is part of his appeal to scouts. He's shown some power potential at the plate and is still honing his overall approach. Some evaluators believe Lourdes could be considered the top overall player in this year's class, because he has a shorter path to the Major Leagues due to his age and experience..."

Sounds like a great signing -- only "cost" is cash ($22M/7yr), not picks or pool amounts. Probably needs time in the minors but we've seen other Cuban players come and quickly transition to the big leagues. His versatility is huge given our current roster and prospects - can play SS, 3B, LF, RF, 2B... etc.
JB21 - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 01:16 PM EST (#335226) #
Right, my bad! His last season was actually 2015, which was his age 21 season.
uglyone - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 01:30 PM EST (#335227) #
$3m per year is a nice no-real-risk deal, regardless of the 7yr term. I like it.

his numbers are very good for his age but looking at cuban comps they don't quite scream mlb ready yet imo, so he probably has to earn a spot and could start in AAA.

statistically I love the low strikeout rate he's posted under his very good topline. That lowers the risk factor on him significantly for me.
Gerry - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 01:36 PM EST (#335228) #
Looks like a nice signing. Strengthening the org without trading prospects is always good.

The big question is which position do the Jays see him playing? Scouting reports say he is too big to be a major league shortstop, the Jays have a 3B. He could play second or centrefield. I know Pillar is in CF but if a better option comes around you have to make the switch.

Some of these contracts have odd clauses such as a guaranteed call up date or opt outs or arbitration eligibility. Those details will emerge eventually.
85bluejay - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 01:54 PM EST (#335229) #
At first glance, have to give a thumbs up to this signing - his versatility is exciting - New FO continues to impress.
85bluejay - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 02:00 PM EST (#335230) #
A bit surprised at the amount he signed for - maybe some recent Cuban disappointments - Castillo (Red Sox) and Soler (Cubs), Baldoquin (Angels) kept the price down.
bpoz - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 02:29 PM EST (#335231) #
Gurriel is right handed. 6'4" , 205 lb.

If Batter's Box considers him a prospect then he could crack our top 10 IMO.
Mike Green - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 02:31 PM EST (#335232) #

statistically I love the low strikeout rate he's posted under his very good topline. That lowers the risk factor on him significantly for me.

His strikeout rate was not particularly low for the league. As you can see from the list, a number of players struck out in less than 5% of their PAs and many players struck out in less than 10%.  You can see what Yulieski Gurriel did to see how far Lourdes has to go. 
greenfrog - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 02:44 PM EST (#335233) #
uglyone, acquiring Hill would not be about "adding SP insurance." Rather, it would be about adding a potential ace to create a powerhouse rotation. Liriano as the #6 in that scenario is merely an incidental benefit.

Per Jeff Sullivan on fangraphs, also from today:

TD: Wouldn’t Rich Hill be a perfect candidate for “relief ace”, like Andrew Miller perfected in the postseason? It would probably be similar money and his innings potential would be close.

Jeff Sullivan: Rich Hill is already a perfect candidate for starting ace

Jay_B: If Rich Hill is gettable on something like a 2/$40 deal, should the Cubs get involved?

Jeff Sullivan: Every contender with money should get involved
jerjapan - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 02:51 PM EST (#335235) #
He's definitely a top ten prospect for us right now, and it does sound like he's starting in AA. I love his versatility and athleticism - this is a great move at a very reasonable price, although he will likely be arb-eligible assuming he makes it through 3 years in the bigs.
dan gordon - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 02:55 PM EST (#335236) #
The 2 Gurriels were getting a lot of attention last offseason. Lourdes was thought to be the big prize given the age differences, but Yulieski was thought to be mlb ready. Perhaps his poor numbers with Houston this year helped to keep the price for Lourdes down. Rumours last winter were that Lourdes would sign for more than $22 million. I'm seeing on Rotoworld that Yahoo sports is saying he'll initially play SS, but could move to 3B, 2B or outfield, and will start 2017 in AA ball. Very nice signing, adding an excellent prospect for a reasonable cost.

Rotoworld also indicating that, per Jon Morosi, the Blue Jays are showing interest in Josh Reddick, which is no surprise.
uglyone - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 02:56 PM EST (#335237) #
I hope he has the D to stick at a premium position like SS or CF because his bat seems to project more as average.
SK in NJ - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 03:04 PM EST (#335238) #
The versatility defensively will certainly help him as a player. Ultimately it will come down to his bat and whether it will be good enough to stick wherever he plays. We'll see.

Regardless, in the grand scheme of things the Jays were able to improve the farm system and add a solid young talent without losing anything. That's always a bonus. The Cuban market has been hit or miss over the years, but it's an avenue the Jays should definitely keep exploring as it is just another way to add talent to the organization.
dan gordon - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 03:14 PM EST (#335239) #
What level is the Cuban National Series comparable to? I'm seeing estimates ranging from regular A ball to a bit better than AA. If you take the middle ground, and call it advanced A ball, Lourdes' numbers look good. Taking his last 3 years, at ages 19 through 21, he has shown significant improvement, raising his batting average from .218 to .344, his OPS from .675 to .967 and his HR's from 1 to 10 (in 218 AB's). A 21 year old hitting .344 in advanced A with a .967 OPS, who has been showing very good improvement over the last couple of seasons sounds very good to me.
Gerry - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 03:16 PM EST (#335240) #
Blue Jays are pursuing Kendrys Morales per Ken Rosenthal. This means the Jays are either pursuing Morales or looking to apply pressure to Edwin to make up his mind.
Richard S.S. - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 03:39 PM EST (#335241) #
Well, at least Kendrys Morales is a switch hitting, power bat for the middle of the lineup.
Richard S.S. - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 04:06 PM EST (#335243) #
Morales signs?
Cracka - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 04:06 PM EST (#335244) #
Morales signed -- $33/3 years. Reasonable money for his age 34-36 seasons. Almost exclusively a DH now -- but did start 5 games in RF and 6 at 1B last season.

This FO sure likes to move fast. I'm impressed.
Mike Green - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 04:09 PM EST (#335245) #
I like the Gurriel move for the reasons dangordon gave.  It should be noted though age 23 in double A is a little on the high side. 

Rich Hill would be a fine acquisition.  He's obviously a gamble, and you don't expect to pay $20 million a year.  If he can give you 120 good innings (let alone great innings as he did last year- including the playoffs), that's worthwhile and a very useful addition to a rotation.  Liriano is coming off a concussion and should not be counted on to throw 200 innings next year. 

Gerry - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 04:09 PM EST (#335247) #
Bye Edwin.
PeterG - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 04:16 PM EST (#335248) #
EE wants 5 years. That is not reasonable and would be a bad deal imo. FO is doing the right thing. There will be more signings.
85bluejay - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 04:18 PM EST (#335249) #
Morales power should uptick at RC - I had guessed 2/26, so
3/33 isn't bad - I like that he's a SH - goodbye EE and thanks for the memories. FO seems to have similar strategy to last season - strike early. Now, I expect Reddick for RF, though I would love if the Jays can swing a deal for Yelich.
dan gordon - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 04:20 PM EST (#335251) #
I like the Morales deal. Very reasonable price for a middle of the order bat. His career OPS splits are very even, .808 hitting left, .765 hitting right, with the only significant difference being less power right handed, although last year he hit much better right handed than left handed. Could still sign Edwin, and have him play 1B, with Smoak as defensive replacement and injury reserve.
Gerry - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 04:23 PM EST (#335252) #
Morales is no Edwin, but he is half the price. Where will the Jays spend that extra money?
John Northey - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 04:45 PM EST (#335255) #
Love the Cuban signing, not so hot on Kendrys Morales although he has been 119+ for OPS+ every year but 2014 (75). His 795 OPS last year was good and in KC which used to be a pitchers paradise but now is pretty much neutral it seems. Ages 34/35/36. Not a fan of signing for those years that is for sure. Odds are he'll be a bust in at least one of those. FanGraphs has him projected at just shy of 1 WAR next year so expensive on a per WAR basis unless you project him as being better than they do. Better deal than blowing $100 million on EE though I suspect.
Richard S.S. - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 04:53 PM EST (#335257) #
They basically had eight holes to fill. The more that they can fill without going to in-house sources the better. They possibly saved $9.0 - $14.0 Million. What happens next, Dexter Fowler, Ian Desmond or Aroldis Chapman?
Richard S.S. - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 05:06 PM EST (#335258) #
The Jays seem to do a lot of their Business on Fridays. Perhaps to avoid/limit primary News cycles, primary On-Air TV/Radio Shows.
SK in NJ - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 05:12 PM EST (#335259) #
I'm not a fan of the 3rd year. I would have preferred a higher AAV over two years. As far as the signing itself, not surprising. This is very reminiscent of the Estrada/Happ signings from a year ago. It's hard to take WAR at face value with DH's, but I think he's probably good for a wRC+ around 110-120 at this stage in his career. His batted ball profile looked the same as 2015 when he had a wRC+ of 130, but he actually was hitting the ball a lot harder in 2016 (BABIP was down and K's up, though).

Not sure what to expect from him next season. I think he can beat his current projections, but we are probably looking at a 1-2 WAR player overall. Worth the money he'll be making, but not a lot of surplus potential there, especially with his poor base running. If he generates a 4 WAR over 3 years, he's probably worth the contract.

Meh is the best word I can describe. Not bad, but not overly exciting either. Hopefully the OF pick-ups are better.
jerjapan - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 05:19 PM EST (#335260) #
Strongly dislike this move - a DH only who is a serious liability on the basepaths, and is nothing special with the bat.  Strong dislike will turn to hatred if this is the end of the road for EE with the Jays, and I can't see how it isn't.  Most of the FO moves have been good ones, but don't let them sign veteran 1B!
dan gordon - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 05:24 PM EST (#335261) #
Would be really nice to get Reddick. Resign Benoit and a good lefty reliever, sign or trade for an upgrade to Smoak at 1B and sign a decent backup C. If they can do all that, I think they're in good shape, even without EE and JB. I think you can tolerate Upton/Pompey/Carrera in LF.
scottt - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 05:43 PM EST (#335262) #
In theory you can still sign EE to play 1B and trade 1 of them whenever they have a prospect ready to play 1B.

3/33 is better than 2/30. He can be traded or cut as needed. This is a FO who has been able to move veterans for prospects when appropriate.

Glevin - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 05:51 PM EST (#335263) #
Ok with the signing. My guess is the they went after EE and the price was just too high so they moved quickly to replace him.
John Northey - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 06:09 PM EST (#335264) #
Glevin: that makes a ton of sense. Also it could be that EE told them he was going to take his time and the Jays braintrust has no interest in waiting months.
lexomatic - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 06:10 PM EST (#335265) #
Not a fan of 3rd year. This feels like it should be a later in the off season signing. Someone else said "meh". And that's how I feel. I hope he proves us wrong and hits more HR. But I'm really expecting a bunch of .250/ 20+ HR years with no walks. Just not the kind of hitter I want starting.
bpoz - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 06:28 PM EST (#335267) #
I like this move. It is affordable.

Our very good players will move on if/when the get to Free Agent status.

For example, I think Josh Donaldson will move on, when he is a FA.

That is the reality I believe in.

uglyone - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 06:37 PM EST (#335268) #
all our free agents have made it clear, last year and this, that returning is their first choice.
uglyone - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 06:40 PM EST (#335269) #
morales is a slightly above average hitting DH. Value is fine but he's not a strong point on the team. just ok.
jerjapan - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 06:43 PM EST (#335270) #
reminds me of the billy butler signing.

Dave Cameron is not a fan:

He predicted 2 years, 22 million which is more palatable, but still questionable.  The Crowdsourcing number on Fangraphs was 2 years, 17.3 million. 

agree completely with Lexomatic that this is a later in the offseason type move.  I'd rather have rolled the dice on an aging slugger from Asia if we are not bringing back EE or Jose.

scottt - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 06:44 PM EST (#335271) #
I think Donaldson will want a 7 year contract. He'll be 33.
uglyone - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 06:44 PM EST (#335272) #
and imo he's not a replacement for EE. he almost replaces what joey brought last year but nowhere near EE. if he's replacing EE this is just being cheap nd getting worse.

but no reason we can't still sign EE.
PeterG - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 07:04 PM EST (#335273) #
EE is going to Texas......

Jays are more seriously interested in Reddick as long as JBO declines QO.

It is not cheap to take a pass on a 5 year contract or to set a dangerous salary precedent.
uglyone - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 07:27 PM EST (#335274) #
sure it is.
scottt - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 07:43 PM EST (#335275) #
I don't get the Billy Butler comparison. He's a right handed hitter who could never hit right handed pitching.

I predict a lot of pitch running for Morales in the last 3 innings which gives the Jay an excuse to have Pompey in he lineup no matter what.

Richard S.S. - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 08:15 PM EST (#335277) #
At present, Kendrys Morales bats behind Josh Donaldson. Whether Josh hits 2nd or 3rd depends on who leads off. That decision is yet to come. Any chance that a Big Bat gets pinch-run for by an anemic hitter like Pompey will not happen. Chances of Dalton Pompey making this Team, at this time, are remote, but that might change.
SK in NJ - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 08:44 PM EST (#335278) #
Based on last season and the moves made so far, it looks like the FO does not mind spending money in two specific instances:

1) to sign free agents that do not have QO's attached to them.
2) to acquire prospects (Ramirez/McGuire in a trade and Gurriel in a signing)

They jumped early on Estrada/Happ, and it turns out the market for SP's last winter was absurd. In this case, maybe they see the position player market, due to lack of quality options, being pretty expensive and decided to jump early again. Reddick is another name that was linked to the Jays and has no QO attached to him. I could see that also being a possibility depending on the term, but he seems like someone who might get a higher bid elsewhere.

Morales is about six months younger than EE, and the Jays signed him for 3 years, so it's a safe bet that the Jays offer to Edwin was at least three years, at probably double the AAV that Morales got. If they offered something like 3/60 or 4/80 and Edwin balked at it, then there's not much you can do except wish Edwin the best on his new team. I wouldn't have gone much higher than that.
92-93 - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 09:21 PM EST (#335279) #
"I just like to put my comments on the record (as when I suggested that Happ might end up being the bargain off the off-season, or when I predicted that Sanchez would outpitch Stroman this year)."

While we are tooting your horn, can we discuss your predictions for Saunders getting a qualifying offer, or potentially being worth 25m per over 5 years?

Rich Hill is a nice arm, but FAs like Hill don't come to Toronto unless the Jays lead the market for his services, and they are most definitely not in the position to do so when they already have 5 quality MLB SPs and desperately need at least one OF and a 1B.

I have no idea if such a player is available, but if I were trying to reshape this team I would be looking to trade Pillar and Travis for a left-handed, up-the-middle player, and then perhaps targeting Fowler if his contract demands are reasonable.
ComebyDeanChance - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 09:43 PM EST (#335280) #
Morales is about six months younger than EE, and the Jays signed him for 3 years, so it's a safe bet that the Jays offer to Edwin was at least three years, at probably double the AAV that Morales got. If they offered something like 3/60 or 4/80 and Edwin balked at it, then there's not much you can do except wish Edwin the best on his new team. I wouldn't have gone much higher than that.

My read on what happened from the internet rumours, which is perhaps not unlike reading the entrails of pigeons. The pre-season reports were that the two sides never got to salary because they couldn't agree on term. Toronto is said to have offered two plus two. Encarnacion's side didn't counter. Toronto was saying they wouldn't go longer than 4 years in total, and in refusing to counter Encarnacion's side was saying that wasn't going to cut it. The obvious counter would be 4 guaranteed, with a counter to that of 3+1. My guess would be that the latter number is what the Jays recently offered, and Edwin's side decided to try to reach for the 5 year brass ring. This seems borne out by his demands for a 5 year contract.

There is a recent Blair interview online with Edwin's agent, According to his agent, Ross Atkins has been in regular contact with both the agent and with Edwin. Obviously they knew that other teams were in on the options.

This is not a bad outcome at all for Toronto. I'd rather have Morales at 3 than Edwin at 5, even with the same salary. With a much lower salary, perhaps half, it's a no-brainer. It's even more of a no-brainer with the draft pick added.

I feel badly for Edwin, not the Blue Jays. I think he genuinely liked it here, and at some point he'll come to realize that Roy Halladay was right when he said he already had more money than he and his family could ever use and that the additional money doesn't make up for giving up where you want to play. That additional money will likely be much more important to the PA and his agent than it will to Edwin.

I have wondered whether there's a chance that Jose Bautista could be converted to a first baseman. Otherwise, he's down to DH as I can't see any team paying him to play the outfield anymore. I know there has been suggestion of that over the years. A bit hard to see that as part of an off-season signing though.
uglyone - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 09:54 PM EST (#335281) #
"I'd rather have Morales at 3 than Edwin at 5, even with the same salary"

could you explain that?
Richard S.S. - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 11:05 PM EST (#335282) #
Ross Atkins said "There’s always ebb and flow and things that move in one direction and some that don’t," Atkins said of the work accomplished as he left the Omni Scottsdale Resort and Spa. "We’ve had some encouraging things with just a little bit of movement towards potential deals, and we’ve also had things that fell apart. Nothing surprising though."

What the Jays need is a Right/possibly Left Fielder that could also play Center (when Pillar can't). He needs to hit Left-handed or be a Switch Hitter and possess good speed. Dexter Fowler could be the answer, Switch Hitter with speed and can play Center. He has a Q.O., but otherwise he'll only cost just cash. I'm sure there's a trade being discussed, but who comes and who goes. This acquisition should block no one.
scottt - Friday, November 11 2016 @ 11:15 PM EST (#335283) #
Given the options available, they could probably overpay for Reddick since he's a near perfect fit, but overpay might mean 4 years rather than a couple of millions extra. It's worth repeating that good players on a decent contract are usually easy to trade away later.

It seems they attach a money value to acquiring or losing prospects and draft picks.
EE 5/100 or Morales + draft pick for 3/33.
I wonder if they ever got into no-trade clauses.

Has Trump suddenly made Toronto an attractive destination for Hispanic players?

Petey Baseball - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 06:46 AM EST (#335284) #
Good move, I think. Morales has ridiculously good numbers career at the RC if I'm not mistaken.

Sad to lose Edwin, but the Jays likely got the best chance years out of him and he'll be overpaid.

Now go get Reddick and Jansen and we are really cooking with gas.
jensan - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 07:21 AM EST (#335285) #
Morales, Reddick, Cecil and Jansen totals $40 to 42 MM and pushes the payroll to $162 MM.

I believe Steve Pearce could be added to this group and trade Barney + Cabrera opening a space for Pompey. Than Salary for 2016 is approx. $165 mm. not unrealistic with the success of attendance.

My preference stil is to trade for Ryan Braun, for an average salary of $5 MM more a year than Reddick, with a higher War.

We could give up a Greene + another prospect for Braun, and yes I believe he will waive his NTC to Toronto for taking up the option year.

Jays still receive 2- 1st Round Supplementary Picks and you have to include this in the equation.
Mike Green - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 07:38 AM EST (#335286) #
Morales has hit .270/.336/.430 at the RC over his career.  I doubt that had anything to do with the acquisition.  It is nice that he will be here for his countryman Gurriel if and when the youngster arrives. 
jerjapan - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 08:22 AM EST (#335287) #
I don't get the Billy Butler comparison. He's a right handed hitter who could never hit right handed pitching.

Big, slow, DH only types with overrated offensive skills, signed to 3 year deals at 10-11 million per, both deals seemingly over market in terms of length.  But mostly it reminds me of how perplexed I felt when Beane signed Butler. 

Since we are tooting our prognostication horns round here, I'm gonna go out on a limb and say, at first glance (so no, we couldn't have known how good Thor would be), this is the worst move the Jays have made since the JPR days.  I don't think I'm alone in my skepticism - I have yet to see a positive take in the deal in the media - so please post em if you've got em!

I almost feel is if this FO sometimes seems to get too fixated on one solution to a problem - so we sign mediocre switch-hitting 1B / dh types to balance our lineup, and we trade 5 cheap years of Liam Hendricks for one of Jesse Chavez to provide SP depth.  Obviously the Liriano move worked out well, but it was more than just a depth-driven move.  If Biagini ends up in the Buffalo rotation instead of the big league pen, this will be another example IMO. 
jerjapan - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 08:31 AM EST (#335288) #
Griff, of all people, just reported something possibly interesting - the same agency represents Morales and Guriel.  I can't see this influencing Guriel's choice though.

I'm going back to thinking about how awesome the Guriel move is, Morales is too depressing. 

85bluejay - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 08:33 AM EST (#335289) #
Shapiro has spoken so much about mitigating risk since he took over that I was not surprised he wasn't willing to go to 4/5 years for EE - It's why he's ok giving a 7 yr deal to a 23 y.o but not 4/5 to a 33 y.o - Have to wait until the offseason is finished to judge this deal - I like Reddick, couple of LHR.

I am more risk taking than Shapiro - I would try to sign Bett Anderson & Charlie Morton - put J. Happ on the market - try and build a package for Yelich.


Goins & John Murphy

Estrada/Sanchez/Anderson/Stroman/Liriano with Morton as swingman.
PeterG - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 11:02 AM EST (#335290) #
why do some find the Morales deal depressing. He has been one of the best DH's in MLB the past few years and is a switch hitter.

I think too that there is more chance to acquire Reddick than some may think as well. Not predicting it will happen but it is a strong possibility. A wild card in this could be that josh is best buds with our Josh going back to Oakland days. Won't make any difference if the money's not there, but if it is that could be a dealmaker.

Whomever it is, I expect a big signing next week after Jose officially declines the QO on Monday. If he takes it, it will screw up the plans somewhat though I think it highly unlikely that he does.
jerjapan - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 11:19 AM EST (#335291) #
PeterG, it's the 6 straight years with an fWAR below 2 that has me discouraged, including a 0.7 last year and -1.8 in 2014.  For what it's worth, Steamer predicts him for 0.9 next year - at 8.5 million per win, we are paying him more than the market value for next year. 

Factor in age-related decline - big body DH 'slugger' types don't age well - and I don't see his contract being anything but a bust.  And I still haven't seen any media coverage calling this deal a win - the best review of the deal for the Jays I've seen is BP Toronto calling it a 'solid' deal.  I'd be unhappy with this move even for 2 years. 
Parker - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 11:28 AM EST (#335292) #
I like the signing.

The new front office has a fantastic (though admittedly small-sample) record with middle-road free agents. Happ outpitched Price last year by 1.4 WAR with $187M saved on financial commitment. A year from now we might be talking about how Morales provided 90% of the value at 40% of the cost. Even if the third year on the Morales contract is an issue (and it's hard to argue against the premium Toronto has to pay nowadays for free agents) it's not going to cost anywhere near as much as Bautista's second or third years, or Encarnacion's fourth or fifth years, from a value perspective.

If some home-grown talent (or Josh Donaldson) want to be paid to stick around, a smart organization can't commit to ridiculous long-term contract demands from declining elderly players.
China fan - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 11:42 AM EST (#335293) #
It's very difficult to assess the Morales acquisition in isolation.  We need to see the rest of the off-season moves.  We know the Jays have a good rotation and probably a good bullpen (if they acquire one or two more relievers as expected) and we know they need to improve the offense.  Improving the offense will be a tough challenge, especially if they lose Bautista, Edwin and Saunders.  But let's see the full range of off-season moves, and then we can assess whether the lineup as a whole is improved.  If the DH position in the 2017 lineup is somewhat worse than the DH position in 2016 (keeping in mind that Edwin wasn't always the DH in 2016), that could be outweighed by improvements in other positions.  Since there are still so many moving pieces in the jigsaw puzzle, I'd rather see the 2017 lineup as a whole, and then comment on it. 

But in principle, Morales can be a very useful player in a winning lineup, and the cost is reasonable.  If the other off-season moves are good, he could be a valuable acquisition.

ComebyDeanChance - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 11:47 AM EST (#335294) #
I was not surprised he wasn't willing to go to 4/5 years for EE - It's why he's ok giving a 7 yr deal to a 23 y.o but not 4/5 to a 33 y.o

I've not seen any public discussion about a four year deal. Encarnacion's agent has stated 5 years, and as I indicated in my post above, I believe it was likely Encarnacion's unwillingness to give up his one shot at the 5 year brass ring that led his side to fail to make a counter offer in the pre-season, and to reject Toronto's offer this week. I suspect that the notion of a 4 year deal arises only from the virtual unanimity that a 5 year deal for a 34 year old DH is either not going to happen, or if it does, is a deal to be avoided.

Here's an interesting assessment in WaPo about Edwin's projected value over the five years he is seeking. As you'll see, even using the generous projections of free agent value provided at fangraphs, the most reasonable estimated value of a 5 year deal for Edwin is less than half of what he is asking. Giving up a draft pick for the opportunity of this fleecing makes it ridiculous.

There are other teams besides Toronto, like the Red Sox, who were seeking someone as DH. It's been reported that Edwin's side was given a deadline by Toronto, so that they wouldn't be caught at the end of the market with their preferred options gone. The Red Sox are the ones now with limited options and Carlos Beltan and his agents are the big winners.

Toronto now has what I would consider an elite front office. I think that is now being more broadly recognized. Anyone who read the Tom Tippet quote I cited recently about how the Red Sox office worked when Theo and Ben were there, can imagine that this is the type of front office we now have, with the operations group including Shapiro, Atkins, LaCava, Cherington, Murov, Brown etc. I doubt there was a single voice in that large group discussion which suggested Toronto should either sign Edwin to a 5 year deal or else wait for Boston's leftovers at the end of the offseason.
uglyone - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 11:48 AM EST (#335295) #
"He has been one of the best DH's in MLB the past few years"

by what measure?
uglyone - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 12:02 PM EST (#335296) #
A reasonable, ungenerous projection of EE's next 5yrs: 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 = 12.5war. That's $100m in value if you use the $8m per war figure that's likely already inflated and which doesn't account for future inflation. $125m would be $10m over war which might be a bit high but might actually not be.

But EE said he'd take a discount to stay. If that meant $112.5m then that's $9m per war, which is probably the actual free agent WAR value.

A reasonable projection for Morales for the next 3yrs, using the exact same methodology as that EE projection, would be 0.5 0.0 -0.5 = 0.0war. or $0.0/war.

Using the exact same aging curve impact, Morales is more overpaid than no-discount edwin would be.

China fan - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 12:17 PM EST (#335297) #
"....Toronto now has what I would consider an elite front office...."

As long as we are making generalizations about front offices, I think it's worth noting that the Gurriel acquisition is further evidence to validate the strategy that the Jays front office has been following for several years now.  The strategy was basically this:  improve the scouting and the farm system, develop an elite group of prospects, improve the major-league team so that it's within striking distance of the playoffs, and then use some of those many prospects to acquire key veterans to push the team over the final hurdle and into the playoffs.  Then, using the big increase in revenue generated by the emergence of an exciting winning team, expand the payroll and expand the budget for international signings, free agents, etc, and thereby create a sustainable winning team for years to come. 

After the Jays reached the playoffs last year, some people complained that the Jays had "emptied the farm system" and didn't have any way to create a sustainable winner in the future.  (They even cited the "weak free-agent market" as evidence that the Jays would decline.)  I think that was a wrong conclusion.  The Jays did use prospects as trade chips from 2013 to 2015, and then they used their increasing revenue (and the draft) to replenish the farm system with acquisitions such as Guerrero Jr., Gurriel, McGuire, Ramirez, etc.   It is now arguably a top-10 farm system again.  It was a smart move: begin by using the prospects to improve the team and expand its revenue, and then follow up by using the revenue to replenish the system.  The alternative was to hoard the prospects and wait for years in the desperate hope that the prospects would eventually turn the Jays into a winner, while the fan base slowly deteriorates and the revenue stagnates.  I think the Jays have picked the right strategy over the past several years.
ayjackson - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 12:18 PM EST (#335298) #
Exactly what methodology did you use to project WAR, ugly? It seems a bit low, especially if he is DH.
uglyone - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 12:34 PM EST (#335299) #
sorry I thought it was obvious. I just started at the nearest 0.5war increment down from last year, and subtracted 0m5war each year.

Morales was worth 0.7 or 0.9 war last year. So I started at 0.5 next year and moved down.

Edwin was at 3.7 or 3.9 last year, so I started at 3.5 and moved down.

We could be a bit more precise.

Say use EE' s average 3.8 as last year's number and go down 0.5 to start next year. So that's 3.3 2.8 2.3 1.8 1.3 = 11.5 = $92.0

For Morales that would be 0.3 -0.2 -0.7 = -0.6 = -$5.0.

Or we could use a 2yr average. For EE his 2yr avg would be 4.2, so we'd start at 3.7 next year and add 3.2 2.7 2.2 1.7 = 13.5 = $108.0

For Morales that would be 1.5 so we'd start at 1.0 next year and add 0.5 0.0 = 1.5 = $12.5

Of course that's just using blind aging curves.
ayjackson - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 12:49 PM EST (#335300) #
Sorry, wasn't expecting quite so arbitrary. FWIW, Depth Charts projects 2.6 WAR for Edwin and 1.1 for Kendrys.
greenfrog - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 12:57 PM EST (#335301) #
"While we are tooting your horn"

Being right about Sanchez and Happ more than makes up for being wrong about Saunders, believe me. On the other hand, it sounds as if you're having a hard time coping with having been being dead wrong about a prospect (Sanchez) who ended up being the best pitcher on the staff and a Cy Young contender in his first full season as a SP.
jerjapan - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 01:11 PM EST (#335302) #
Several people here and elsewhere have commented that the terms for Morales are manageable enough that even if he underperforms, the loss is not that great.  But there IS risk in mid-tier FAs that goes beyond the money.  There is a very real chance that Morales is a replacement level player for much, or all, of his deal, and that he continues to get playing time despite that fact due to his contract.  We received essentially nothing from Smoak and Chavez this year - players that represent the low end of this tier of players perhaps - for close to 8 million dollars.  It's not at all hard to speculate that we could have had more value from Pompey / Cecilliani, or Tepera / Barnes, to pick names off the top of my head.

Sure, the Happ deal more than makes up for them, but I felt much better about that contract at the time than I do about this one.  The one-dimensional DH is a dying breed, especially for a team as fond of a short bench as the Jays. 

Ugly's numbers are spot on.  Even for a value-conscious FO, EE is the better investment.  Not to mention, losing all our premiere FAs from the past two offseasons will hurt if it happens, especially when EE at least is clearly prepared to sign a below-market deal to stay. 

92-93 - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 01:25 PM EST (#335303) #
"On the other hand, it sounds as if you're having a hard time coping with having been being dead wrong about a prospect (Sanchez) who ended up being the best pitcher on the staff and a Cy Young contender in his first full season as a SP."

Sorry buddy, you must have me confused with SK in NJ.
PeterG - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 01:26 PM EST (#335304) #
WAR is a flawed stat when it come to a pure DH as the one dimensional nature of the position hurts in that calculation. As strictly a DH, Morales has been close to elite...(I said close to). His HR numbers, BA, RBI have always been above average. Also lower K's than average for a DH type. He is a better contact hitter than most including Edwin. Yes, he is a poor base runner but I would argue that intangibles may more than make up for that as he is reputed to be a good clubhouses guy.

Last year, despite a one month slump, he still managed 30 HR in an extreme pitchers park as home base. He should do even better at Rogers Centre. How can anyone be displeased with this?

This is a FO with a clear short term and long term plan unlike the previous one that flew by the seat of it's pants. I applaud both of yesterday's signings and expect more to come. We only have to hope that JBO declines. Latest rumour is that Jays interested in Steve Pearce and the Reddick interest definitely has legs as long as JBO declines.
Alex Obal - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 01:31 PM EST (#335305) #
What does Morales do as a hitter, anyway? How do you get him out? and is there any reason to think his K rate will or won't go over the cliff anytime soon?

I'm still undecided about this one.
92-93 - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 01:33 PM EST (#335306) #
If you write off Morales' injury-riddled 2013 campaign, his bWAR in his last 4 seasons has been 0.9, 2.4, 2.6, and 2.1. I see that Fangraphs isn't as kind, but it's pretty easy to have the two systems meet in the middle and determine that Morales is well worth 3/33m in a market that pays pitchers like Dickey and Colon 8m and 12.5m.

Hopefully the front office's aggressiveness with Morales pays off just like it did with Happ. My sense is that the contract Mark Trumbo is going to sign is going to make us feel better about the Morales deal.
jerjapan - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 01:43 PM EST (#335307) #
WAR is a flawed stat when it come to a pure DH as the one dimensional nature of the position hurts in that calculation.

Fair point, and I certainly do get lazy at times with going to WAR at the exclusion of other stats.  But the counting stats you mention are arguably less valuable.  By wOBA Morales career line rates out at .341 - or above average for all hitters, .12 above the average DH in 2014.  Career wrc+ is 114, again above average for all hitters.  Nothing special for a guy with one tool though.  He's got a nice career ISO of .192, but that's about it that stands out for me (although TBH my statistical knowledge is limited to osmosis from hanging out on the Box).

The Dome will hopefully be a nice hitting environment for Morales, but the career numbers Mike Green posted don't show much promise.  I would be happy to be shown how wrong I am about this, but I have yet to see a convincing argument that this is a good - or even adequate - deal.   85, I know you are a big fan of this move?
SK in NJ - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 01:54 PM EST (#335308) #
Ken Rosenthal ‏@Ken_Rosenthal
Sources: #BlueJays interested in Steve Pearce, possibly as RH platoon partner for Smoak at 1B. @Shidavidi first mentioned possibility.

I think Pearce would be a very good signing, and it probably wouldn't take more than 5 games before Gibbons (rightfully) played him everyday over Smoak.
Alex Obal - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 02:03 PM EST (#335309) #
As some have mentioned, Kauffman Stadium is an enormous park and hitting home runs there is difficult. Only 10 Royals have ever homered 30 times in a season: Steve Balboni (his 36 is the franchise record), Gary Gaetti, John Mayberry the elder, Dean Palmer, Danny Tartabull (the only repeat offender), Jermaine Dye, Tecmo Bo, George Brett, and Chili Davis. And Kendrys Morales, who just became the first guy to do it since Dye in 2000.

I know, it's the Royals. Still, a legit switch-hitter with decent contact skills who can also get himself on that list? I can see the appeal.
SK in NJ - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 02:11 PM EST (#335310) #
wRC+ is league and park adjusted, so even if his stats (OBP/SLG) look better in Toronto, it may not mean his actual offensive performance is better. It depends on whether he's the 120-130 wRC+ player he was for most of 2009-15 (aside from 2014), or the 110-ish wRC+ player he was last season and projected to be next season. I'm not sure what to expect from him, aside from bad base running.

I think the 3rd year is unappealing, but for a short-term fix in a position of need where they had no one internally to fill the spot, it is fine. They'll need to add more talent, though. Pearce would be a good start.
PeterG - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 02:13 PM EST (#335311) #
As Morales and Gourriel have the same agent, it is quite possible that the 3rd year for Morales was part of the price for getting G0urriel.
Glevin - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 02:15 PM EST (#335312) #
WAR is a useful stat but it has severe limitations. The biggest is that teams don't value offence and defence the same way WAR does. You will see teams always pay more for hitters than they do for defence-first players. Offfense is worth more to teams.
eudaimon - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 02:16 PM EST (#335313) #
I like the signing alright. As China says, it really depends on what else they do this offseason. If this is the only acquisition, for example, it's not a great signing.

It's important to note that Fangraphs punishes DHs for not fielding, so it makes him look worse from a WAR perspective. Perhaps his value is better viewed by looking at his RC+, which has been pretty good for most of his career.

I like that he's a switch hitter with no platoon splits of note. I also like that his K rate is reasonable, and not at Michael Saunders levels. He is slow however and will ground into a fair amount of double plays, so it doesn't really fix that problem.

I assume Morales will be more or less a strict DH, maybe taking the outfield very occasionally when a ground ball pitcher is on the mound or something.

This does make it pretty unlikely that Encarnacion will return. It's not impossible, as it would be pretty easy to DFA Smoak and take on EE as the regular first baseman, but I doubt it will happen. Some team will pay him.

Perhaps this makes it more likely that Bautista will return. He could play outfield and split 1B with Smoak.

China fan - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 02:20 PM EST (#335314) #
If the Jays acquire Pearce and he plays primarily at first base, their DH/1B lineup positions would potentially go from Encarnacion/Smoak (2016) to Morales/Pearce (2017).   Of course that omits the other players (Saunders, Bautista) who often played at DH, but let's look at it that way for the sake of simplicity.   Can they get more offense from Morales/Pearce than they got from Encarnacion/Smoak?  I suspect so.  Or close enough anyway.
uglyone - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 02:22 PM EST (#335315) #
"Several people here and elsewhere have commented that the terms for Morales are manageable enough that even if he underperforms, the loss is not that great."


but unfortunately this seems to be the philosophy behind every signing now.

Parker - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 02:25 PM EST (#335316) #
If the Jays had half a dozen minor league hitting prospects knocking down the door, the Morales signing might look a lot less attractive. The Jays don't have that luxury.

If the alternative is to spend three times as much to retain a hitter whose only indication of considering a hometown discount is the same rhetoric espoused by the agency of EVERY impending free agent (other than Bautista, who foolishly made some absurd public comments right before the worst season of his career since he was considered anything more than replacement-level) then the posters arguing that for alternative are then undermining their own opinions that the Jays have a top-ten minor league system that is guaranteed to produce hitting prospects controlled at the major-league minimum who will provide much better value by the second or third year of that theoretical contract.
uglyone - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 02:31 PM EST (#335317) #
"If you write off Morales' injury-riddled 2013 campaign, his bWAR in his last 4 seasons has been 0.9, 2.4, 2.6, and 2.1. I see that Fangraphs isn't as kind, but it's pretty easy to have the two systems meet in the middle and determine that Morales is well worth 3/33m in a market that pays pitchers like Dickey and Colon 8m and 12.5m."

I dunno. He earned near 1war last year. He's earned about 1war per year the last 3yrs on average. steamer projects him for about 1war next year....and that's with the iffy suggestion that he improves at age 34. Even if he earns 1war in each year from 34-36 without declining with age, it's still an overpay for a one war player. And that even ignores an argent az to whether it's ever worthwhile to pay even market value for 1war players.

But I get it - it's not enough money to hurt if he flops. Seems like we're getting a team full of those types.
Parker - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 02:31 PM EST (#335318) #
I'd also add that the "mediocre" free agents that the new front office has signed have produced exceptional surplus value, while the departing free agents have been disappointments for their new organizations in the FIRST year of their bloated long-term contracts.

Maybe it's time give a rest to second-guessing the professionals. Sit back and let them do their jobs, and save the whining for three or four years in the future, if the plan doesn't work out.
uglyone - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 02:40 PM EST (#335319) #
"the posters arguing that for alternative are then undermining their own opinions that the Jays have a top-ten minor league system that is guaranteed to produce hitting prospects controlled at the major-league minimum who will provide much better value by the second or third year of that theoretical contract."

I don't get this. The confidence in the minor league system producing productive cheap players makes the prospect of having some poor value contracts for older players in 3-5yrs from now less daunting.

I would much rather be counting on our kids to fill in at the bottom of the roster in their first few years than for us to need them to be star top of roster players right away for us to compete. I'm fully confident that we'll have kids coming up to give us 1-3war cheap production at the bottom of the lineup - whether they can blossom into 3+war impact players is a much riskier proposition. I am glad Sanchez and Osuna turned into impact top of the roster players but i'd rather we hadn't built a roster that depended on it.
uglyone - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 02:43 PM EST (#335320) #
"Maybe it's time give a rest to second-guessing the professionals. Sit back and let them do their jobs, "

well that'll put an end to internet message boards right quick.

I'll be fair - I have much more confidence in this FO's ability to scout and value pitching. but their valuations of smoak upton bruce morales leave me skeptical when it comes to hitters.
uglyone - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 02:54 PM EST (#335321) #
I like the targetting of Pearce though - if we're going go cheap I prefer going with riskier guys with higher upside. a healthy Pearce can be a legit impact player.

he just had surgery on his flexor mass, though, so our docs better be on their game.
jerjapan - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 03:05 PM EST (#335322) #
"I'd also add that the "mediocre" free agents that the new front office has signed have produced exceptional surplus value, while the departing free agents have been disappointments for their new organizations in the FIRST year of their bloated long-term contracts."

Your argument would be far more compelling if it demonstrated any awareness of the counter-arguments.  I listed several examples in my last post.  Speak about Smoak and Chavez - it's called 'rebutting' - it shows that you aren't just shouting your own opinion, over and over.

I've also argued repeatedly that it's almost certain that Price opts out of his 'bloated' contract, making your argument irrelevant.  Please address that point. 

You've also trotted out your point that a quality farm system needs position players.  You failed, again, to address the pitching that we have produced.  Is your point that a farm needs a balance between both?  Then articulate that point.  Continuing to repeat yourself while you ignore counter arguments from highly intelligent posters is becoming very tiresome. 

You are basically talking about Happ and Estrada in terms of good contracts, and ignoring everything else.

Come on man, prove me wrong.  And try to do it without shouting.
eudaimon - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 03:23 PM EST (#335323) #
How can you be so sure that Price opts out of his contract? He has an opt-out in 2018.  He will be 33+ years old at that point. He has four years at between 31-32 million after that point.

I'd say he'd have to return to true ace status in order to have a reason to opt-out. He will be making ridiculous money in those four years, so if he's anything less than elite he won't be getting anything more.

This year he was a solidly above average pitcher, not an elite one. He lost a bit over 1 MPH on his fastball. He served up more home runs than in any other year since his rookie season. He once again sucked in the playoffs. His ERA, FIP, and FIP+ were all in the mid 3s, which is a lot closer to JA Happ than Clayton Kershaw.

That's not to say Price is a bad pitcher, but it's very questionable that he'll be worth elite money two years from now at age 33, after his worst season in quite some time when he showed some worrying trends.

jerjapan - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 03:52 PM EST (#335324) #
Eudaimon, only time will tell, and you are totally correct about the worrying indicators from Price's 2016 season.  But he had an fWAR of 4.5 and projects for the same value next season.  His xFIP was a half runner better than his era - I think Price pitched better than he appeared to this last year and expect him to be better next year.  It wasn't that long ago that everyone wrote off Verlander and he looks like he will make his contract seem good value for the Tigers.  I see Price as a similar arm, and at 33 years of age, he should be able to command another big FA deal.  A win costs 8.5 million or so this offseason, and that's only going to continue rising.  

His next big deal is likely his last, but I continue to think he will opt out. 

But obviously, I can't be sure.  It just seems like the opt-outs are the new way of doing business for the top FAs, and the idea can be valuable to both parties - provided you sign the right guys, and not Ian Kennedy.

PeterG - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 03:54 PM EST (#335325) #
Once Price loses 3 mph on his fastball he's done. His secondary pitches are not elite in any way. This will turn out to be a horrible contract unless he opts out which he won't unless his performance improves over that of 2016.
Glevin - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 04:21 PM EST (#335327) #
Like others, I think ts better to see the entirety of the offseason before going crazy. Is Morales an amazing signing? No. he is ok but he could be part of a very good off-season. If the Jays can get a starting OFer and upgrade pen and get some better depth, it will end up looking very different.
dan gordon - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 04:27 PM EST (#335328) #
Morales WAR per BR in 2012 was 2.1, in 2013 it was 2.6, in 2014 he was hurt for much of the year and didn't hit well when he was in the lineup, so I'm giving him a pass on that year. In 2015 he was back up to 2.4. That's very consistent performance and, to me, establishes a level of expectation. Then in 2016, he was in a horrible slump for the first 2 months the year - maybe he was hurt, I don't know, but then he produced at a very strong level for the balance of the year. In his last 404 plate appearances, he was outstanding, with an OPS of .911, a BA of .302 and 24 HR's. At that pace for a year he would have produced a WAR that was easily within the 2012, 2013, 2015 range, probably above it. I think it is a mistake to factor in that 2 month slump unduly in the attempt to extrapolate a performance expectation for the next 3 years. Aside from that slump and the injury riddled 2014 season, he has been an above 2 WAR player. I expect he will experience some decline due to age over the 3 years of his new deal. Wouldn't be surprised to see a WAR of something like 2.1, 1.7, 1.3 for the 3 years, as long as he's healthy.

Pearce might be a nice addition, due to his versatility, but he's been very inconsistent the last few years, so it's hard to project how he will hit. In 2013, he hit .261 with a .782 OPS, then in 2014 he hit .293 with a .930 OPS, followed by .218 and .711 in 2015. Last year he was back up to .309 and .908 with Tampa, but then he fell to .217, .729 with Baltimore, although in only 70 plate appearances. He's one of those guys who has hit better late in his career, although that may largely be due to greater playing time. For his career, he's got a .254 average and 774 OPS, numbers which are substantially better than what Smoak has done.
uglyone - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 04:36 PM EST (#335329) #
I mean even if we give kendrys a pass on his bad years EE's still been twice as valuable as him. if we include his bad years - which we should - it's close to three times as valuable.
uglyone - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 04:42 PM EST (#335330) #
edwin's agent says they're still talking and talked with atkins this morning.
dan gordon - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 05:04 PM EST (#335331) #
No doubt EE's been a much better hitter than Morales. It would be great to keep him. I figured they had about $50 million to spend in the offseason, if the budget is in the $165-170 million range. Morales and Gurriel take up $14 million. If they use another $22-24 million for EE, that leaves about $13 million for an outfielder, backup catcher and 2 relievers. Means no Reddick, so you'd be looking at guys like Angel Pagan, Saunders, Rasmus, Rajai Davis, that kind of thing. Or maybe, just maybe, Rogers surprises and ups the budget to $175-180 million. Now wouldn't that be nice.
Parker - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 05:15 PM EST (#335332) #
Your argument would be far more compelling if it demonstrated any awareness of the counter-arguments. I listed several examples in my last post. Speak about Smoak and Chavez - it's called 'rebutting' - it shows that you aren't just shouting your own opinion, over and over.

Neither one was a signed as a free agent. I'd be a lot less wary responding to your posts if you actually read mine before demanding proof of a point I never tried to make.

I've also argued repeatedly that it's almost certain that Price opts out of his 'bloated' contract, making your argument irrelevant. Please address that point.

I'm willing to concede that you've argued repeatedly that you are certain Price opts out.

You've also trotted out your point that a quality farm system needs position players. You failed, again, to address the pitching that we have produced. Is your point that a farm needs a balance between both? Then articulate that point.

Sure, I'll be happy to once the Jays have enough of a surplus of young impact pitchers to trade some of them for young impact hitters. Honestly guy, the straw man bit is getting stale pretty fast.

Continuing to repeat yourself while you ignore counter arguments from highly intelligent posters is becoming very tiresome.

It's very rare that I don't respond to the highly intelligent posters.

You are basically talking about Happ and Estrada in terms of good contracts, and ignoring everything else.

Who are the other free agents that the Jays have signed since Shapiro took over?

Come on man, prove me wrong. And try to do it without shouting.

I'm pretty sure I can refuse to defend a point I never tried to make without shouting.
PeterG - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 05:47 PM EST (#335333) #
I am not sure I would believe EE's agent....needs as much leverage as he can get for talks with Rangers. Jays have moved on. The only exception might be if EE came back down to the take it or leave it offer he received first of the week. Even then, not sure Jays would bite. They have made other plans.
PeterG - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 05:55 PM EST (#335334) #
and if they did talk, it would likely be because Atkins was pulling any previous offer off the table. EE may not stand up physically if full time at 1b. I would move on as I believe they are doing.
jerjapan - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 05:58 PM EST (#335335) #
I do appreciate the comments around the Morales deal.  I have certainly moderated my position thanks to the thoughtful comments round here.

Parker, Smoak and Chavez are examples of my larger point - the possible mis-allocation of money on mid-level talent.  Smoak was to be a FA, and Chavez was in his final arb year.  They are relevant to a conversation around resource allocation, FAs or not.  I absolutely read your post, and assumed you would get the argument I was making.

Conceding that I've made a point that Price will opt out is not addressing the point I'm making - that is obvious I think.  The point I asked you to consider is the likelihood of his opting out.  When you continue to quote the full value of the contract without addressing the opt-out, you are missing the full argument.  Intentionally, I assume.

As to the farm, you again dodge the point.  We have had so many impact pitchering prospects that since the trade deadline of 2012 (which I think is fair to say is the open window that AA was seeking) we were able to acquire 5th starter in JA Happ who clearly had untapped potential, a Cy Young winner, a perennial all-star SS and two mid-rotation starters, a rental ace, another all-star SS and various mid-level talents and bit-parts.  You talk about straw man fallacies? 

I find people with flexible opinions, who are influenced by reasonable discourse, to be the 'very intelligent' ones.  Not people who are only interested in posts that they agree with.

Once again, I invite you to respond to the content of my arguments, as opposed to playing semantics.

And of course, the shouting comment refers to your track record of shouting.  Fortunately for my argument, that's an objective fact.

Mike Green - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 05:59 PM EST (#335336) #
dangordon, I wouldn't look at Morales' 2016 that way.  He was very cold in April and May, scorching in June, very cold again in July, decent in August and then very hot in September when the Royals were often facing lesser pitching. I'd treat the season as a whole myself. 

His BBRef comparables include some good hitters- Galarraga, Andre Thornton, Travis Hafner, Donn Clendenon. Only Galarraga was any good from age 34. 
uglyone - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 06:21 PM EST (#335337) #
bottom line is if you think the morales deal is good, you should want to give EE at least 3 times as much.

if you care about being consistent, and not just about proving a point.
ComebyDeanChance - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 06:24 PM EST (#335338) #
His BBRef comparables include some good hitters- Galarraga, Andre Thornton, Travis Hafner, Donn Clendenon. Only Galarraga was any good from age 34.

This is exactly the point in the WaPo article I linked above. I expect you'll find a similar lack of great comps after age 34 for Edwin, which is why one is wary about signing 34 year olds to 5 year six figure deals.
dan gordon - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 06:32 PM EST (#335339) #
Mike, yes, he had a bad July, but even so, his OPS was in the .660 range, not that out of line, and the June, Aug and Sept numbers were all over .800. I suspect he might have either been injured at the start if the season, or pressing because it was a contract year. Of course, it could just be random fluctuation, and we can't know for sure.

As far as the comps are concerned, how does the fact that Morales has missed so much time impact those comparisons? He didn't play much until he was 26, then missed most of his age 27 season, all of his age 28 season and a big chunk of his age 31 season. I don't know how that factors in - can you enlighten? I just looked at the top 2 comps, Sorrento and E.Robinson, and neither was any good in their age 32 or age 33 seasons, which is not the case with Morales. The 3rd closest comp, C.Hart, was terrible in his age 32 and age 33 seasons, after missing his age 31 season. Those comps don't make much sense to me. Maybe there was some similarity in their earlier careers, but the most recent 2 seasons aren't reasonable at all, and those would be the 2 seasons that have the most relevance in projecting the next couple of years.
pubster - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 06:53 PM EST (#335340) #
Jerjapan lol you're not even close to an intelligent poster.

Parker just ignore him :)
Michael - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 07:16 PM EST (#335341) #
I don't get the people saying that years, without dollar amounts, is the challenge. I mean if you'd be good with 4/80 for EE wouldn't you be happy with 5/80 for him or 5/75?

Check if EE wants a 9 figure contract could go even longer and do something like:

Year 1: 12M
Year 2: 13M
Year 3: 14M
Year 4: 15M
Year 5: 16M
Year 6: 17M
Year 7: 18M

That's 7/105, but with money deferred a little that isn't necessarily that much more than a flat 20, 20, 20, 20 4/80 contract would be. Sure he's probably no good in the last half of the contract, but maybe he's like Ortiz and still good then. I'd wager he provides enough surplus value early in that contract to cover the back half.
jerjapan - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 07:18 PM EST (#335342) #
Morales didn't establish himself in the bigs till 2009 at age 26 despite arriving in 2004, another cause for concern.  His career might look a whole lot better if he hadn't missed a year and a half after breaking his leg in a walk-off grand slam celebration. 

He did escape from Cuba on a raft, which according to Wikipedia was his 8th attempt to escape, including some that apparently lead to jail time.  For those reasons alone I have a new level of respect for the guy. 

PeterG - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 07:29 PM EST (#335343) #
EE didn't exactly start off his career well either...waived twice I believe. He has done well but I would not want any part of 5 years with a decline almost a certainty. He has had several hand and wrist injuries. I would even be uneasy with 4 years and I like the guy.

I think Morales will surprise on the upside and is probably more of a team guy than the 2 who are leaving.
ComebyDeanChance - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 08:04 PM EST (#335344) #
I suspect that there may me a number of moves shortly after the expiry Monday of the QO deadline. It'll be interesting to see the entirety of the offseason, including perhaps some trades. One name that I keep thinking of Is Michael Brantley.
scottt - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 08:29 PM EST (#335345) #
It's certainly possible to play both EE and Morales, for a year or two anyway.

Red Sox really don't seem interested in EE. There's not a lot of team who have the means to spend 125M on a DH.
Detroit is in a rebuild. Baltimore looks set. Angels have Pujols. Mariners have Cruz for another 2 years.
Rangers seem focused on  CF and pitching.

Cracka - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 08:42 PM EST (#335346) #
He did escape from Cuba on a raft

There's a great NY Times article from 2005 about Morales' journey to the big leagues after defecting ( -- much of the story is about his agent at the time, a unknown Toronto accountant named John Di Manno, who had never represented anyone before but took an exceptional interest in Morales after meeting him as a young player in Cuba. Di Manno still lives in Toronto and operates an accounting & staffing firm. I have no idea if he's still friends with or connected to Morales who has switched agents several times during his career. But it's an interesting Toronto connection to Morales' defection from Cuba and subsequent residency in D.R.
SK in NJ - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 09:12 PM EST (#335347) #
The Jays need a RF and LF, and if they insist on starting Smoak at 1B, then they'll need a platoon partner for him as well. That's just the offense. On the pitching side they'll need some pen help and SP depth. Spending $11M on Morales and then adding some $20M annually (for 4+ years) for Encarnacion on top of that just doesn't make any sense. I think the Jays have clearly moved on.
jerjapan - Saturday, November 12 2016 @ 11:24 PM EST (#335348) #
Awesome story Cracka! 

Is Bolsinger not SP depth?  We traded last year's starting pitching depth, Jesse Chavez, for the guy.  What is the talent level desired by the 'we need starting depth' crowd?  Is Bolsinger the 6th guy, the 7th guy, the 8th?  Scott Copeland could be on the list.  Last year we gave away Wade Leblanc, who came free and ended up pitching a bunch of MLB innings.  IMO, these guys are replacement level.  If a legit half season starter is needed, Biagini could be stretched out, or we could trade for a Leblanc type.  Just stock the AAA rotation with quality AAAA types and we have our 6th starter covered. 

sometimes even a young guy can fill the need.  Nobody saw Osuna on the radar.  I remember Juan Guzman wasn't so impressive statistically when called up - an SRF or Greene could also surprise. 

I'd genuinely like to hear a couple of example systems that have adequate SP depth, or a few actual names of people other than Biagini who might fill the need.  how many contenders are actually 6 starters deep?

I assume it's not just Biagini to the buffalo rotation that satisfies the SP depth crowd?  Or am I wrong on that?  

Shoeless Joe - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 12:12 AM EST (#335349) #
The more I look into Morales the less impressed I am with him.

Hes an above hitter league wide, but when you put it into context for what a full time DH should hit the production really isn't there.

His wRC+ of 110 was less than the likes of Pedro Alvarez :117, Evan Gattis: 119, Mike Napoli: 113 and just better than Billy Butler: 105.

I would have liked the signing as a complimentary piece, but if this mean we walk away from a top 10-15 hitter in the American league in Edwin it just seems wrong.
uglyone - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 01:25 AM EST (#335350) #
yeah the idea that we need to spend real money on 6/7/8 SP sounds odd to me, especially when we have the deepest starting staff in baseball already.
Glevin - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 02:45 AM EST (#335351) #
Every team has starting depth. The Jays were exceptionally healthy last year so only needed a sixth starter a couple of times. That is not a scenario you can bank on. It's reasonable to expect 15-20 starts needed and you have to plan for more. You need some guys in AAA or the pen who can at least hold their own in the majors or you are basically giving away games.
uglyone - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 02:48 AM EST (#335352) #
what team spends money on AAA depth pitchers?
dan gordon - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 03:01 AM EST (#335353) #
When you compare Morales' wRC+ to those 5 guys in 2015, you'll see how superior Morales was - he was 130, while Alvarez was 113, Gattis was 102, Napoli was 98 and Butler was 100. Morales' 130 was only 7 behind Ortiz that year. I think it's important to look at a player's last several seasons to get a truer reflection of where his career is at and what the player is likely to produce the next year.

I often find that in roto pool drafts, players get drafted based mainly on last year's results, and if you dig into the player's entire career, and also some trends from the previous year, like odd slumps and injury issues which are unlikely to repeat, you can do substantially better than most participants.
whiterasta80 - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 07:28 AM EST (#335354) #
Also don't forget that most of those dh comps we platoon bats being put in the best situations for success. Not true for Morales.

Assuming this isn't our only piece of business in the offseason then I'm happy with the move.
scottt - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 08:25 AM EST (#335355) #
Yeah. Bolsinger should be the long man who can get stretched for a few starts. Biagini should be stretched in Buffalo for the first 2 or 3 months, then you can always acquire someone in a salary dump trade.

There's Chris Smith, Danny Barnes, Tepera and a few others who can pitch middle relief.
Greene looks to me like a guy who needs to start in the pen anyway, could use an uptick in speed and doesn't have many plus pitches.

Cleveland didn't have anything amazing for 6th and 7th pitchers. The lost in the World Series. In a 7th game. In extra innings. I bet you they're not going to focus on pitching depth this winter.

scottt - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 09:02 AM EST (#335356) #
Maybe it's time for a trip down memory lane.

In 2015, the opening rotation was Dickey, Buehrle, Hutchison, Sanchez and Norris. The last two weren't ready.

In 2014, it was Dickey, Buehrle, Hutchison, Happ, McGowan and  Brandon Morrow. Happ managed to make 30 stats that year despite not starting in April.

In 2013, the opening rotation was Dickey, Buehrle, Happ, Josh Johnson and Brando Morrow.

There was Brandon Morrow who seems to be pitching fewer innings every year. He's down to 16 last year.  JJ who was clearly not healthy and Happ who was almost decapitated by a comebacker.

Obviously, it's nice to have a few AAA guys competing for the 5th spot, especially if they are good enough, but AA has traded them all away. Getting Biagini was such an amazing move. I know Happ is a precedent, but arguably, it's Morrow that should have started in the pen in 2013 and putting expensive starters in the pen makes no sense.

They still need 2 outfielders and a backup catcher.
SK in NJ - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 09:51 AM EST (#335357) #
The Jays don't need to invest tons of money into starting pitching since they have the luxury of having five capable SP's already, but all it takes is one injury to mess things up. As bad as Chavez was in the pen last season, at least he was an MLB calibre pitcher who could fill in if someone had to miss time. I'm fine with Biagini in AAA as the 6th starter and Bolsinger as the long man since he's out of options, but they'll need more depth than that. Another Gavin Floyd type or two wouldn't hurt.

As far as Morales, his numbers against RHP last season was the main reason for his decreased performance. His batted ball profile wasn't significantly different than his norm (he was actually hitting the ball a lot harder in 2016), but a .244 BABIP against RHP was likely a big part of his numbers dipping. I think he's a solid candidate to out perform his projections next season, at least with wRC+, but it remains to be seen. Nothing was terribly out of the ordinary with his numbers last season.
Glevin - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 09:57 AM EST (#335358) #
"what team spends money on AAA depth pitchers?"

Depends what you mean. $15m a year contracts, no. But teams will spend a few million on these guys easily. Even Ryan Vogelsong cost $2m last year and he's garbage and 39 yo. Jesse Chavez signed for almost $6m.

Also, has been noted, the jays are unqique in that they don't have AAA starters who can pitch in the majors. At least one of Their young guys will likely be ready to contribute some by 2018 aside from Hutchison, the last year, the top of the system has been empty. You are vastly overrating the ability to pick up passable arms for cheap. Again, I wouldn't spend a ton of money on starting depth (unless the Jays plan on trading a pitcher) but they need a couple of guys who can start if needed and that will likely cost a little money.
uglyone - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 11:23 AM EST (#335359) #
we picked up chavez floyd feldman biagini bolsinger last year. I expect we'll do similar this year.

i don't get this obsession.

people are vastly overrating what the typical mlb team has for SP depth.

Cleveland's SP depth this was Mike Clevinger, Cody Anderson, Zach McCallister, and Ryan Merritt. They made it to the world series.
bpoz - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 11:33 AM EST (#335360) #
If I am correct in saying that none of us knows the actual amount or range of the 2017 budget, then we are speculating.

There is even the strong possibility that a teams FO will state a figure and then deviate strongly from it. I was very surprised when the Jays did this in 2013. The budget sky rocketed.

I think there used to be a thread near ST that asked us to make predictions. This way each of us can take pride and credit of being right. And forgiven for being wrong.

I correctly predicted that Brett Cecil would be the best of the 2010 rotation. I will not bother mentioning any of my other predictions. However I have forgiven myself and want to forget my other predictions.

Richard S.S. - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 01:08 PM EST (#335361) #
.@JimBowden_ESPN: "#BlueJays are in on Josh Reddick & have discussed a trade with #Mets for Jay Bruce. Working on LH platoon for Upton"

8:07 AM - 13 Nov 2016
Mike Green - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 01:27 PM EST (#335362) #
people are vastly overrating what the typical mlb team has for SP depth.

Cleveland's SP depth this was Mike Clevinger, Cody Anderson, Zach McCallister, and Ryan Merritt. They made it to the world series.

Clevinger and Anderson made 19 starts (almost all of the starts lost to injury) and threw 83 innings in those starts with an ERA of well over 6.70 and a 2-7 record.  While Cleveland was unlucky to lose Carrasco and Salazar in September, the loss was mitigated to a significant degree by the expanded rosters.  Had the injuries occurred at the beginning of June, the loss would have been felt much more acutely and it is quite likely that Cleveland would not have found itself in a good position at the deadline.Timing is everything- if Salazar's injury had occurred just a few weeks before, he might have been shape to get back in the rotation for the playoffs; they might have won the World Series if that had happened.

Anyways, it is perfectly clear that it is worthwhile to have a 6th starter who is 1-2 wins above replacement, and a couple of other starters who are replacement level or slightly above.  They'll get the work to justify it. 
Parker - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 01:33 PM EST (#335363) #
The typical MLB team doesn't make the playoffs.
uglyone - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 01:48 PM EST (#335364) #
""Clevinger and Anderson made 19 starts (almost all of the starts lost to injury) and threw 83 innings in those starts with an ERA of well over 6.70 and a 2-7 record. "

well yeah - exactly.
China fan - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 02:34 PM EST (#335365) #
Drew Hutchison would probably have out-performed Cleveland's 6th starters last year (certainly he did in 2015) and the Jays deliberately kept Hutch available and stretched-out in Buffalo as their potential 6th starter for most of the season until he was traded for Liriano.  So it's very clear that the Jays value rotation depth.  But would they pay more than a few million for a 6th starter?  Probably not.  I can see them giving Chavez-type money to a 6th starter, who can do double-duty as a reliever, but I can't see them giving Liriano-type money for someone who might not be needed for most of the season.  So I agree with ugly's point here: it shouldn't be too difficult for the Jays to acquire a 6th starter for a reasonable price (a few million at most) and stash him in the bullpen or Buffalo.  There are plenty of options out there.
PeterG - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 02:40 PM EST (#335366) #
Anyone know anything about Felipe Castenada, signed to minor league contract along with Shane Optiz. I can't fins anything on Felipe.
John Northey - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 05:36 PM EST (#335367) #
All I can find on Felipe is he is a RHP. No one with the name Felipe Castenada has ever been drafted, in fact only 6 guys named Felipe have ever been drafted (Felipe Alou Jr Jr twice, and Felipe Garcia twice - neither reached, plus 4 other guys). Two Castenada's have been drafted, both in the 90's and long retired. Another Castenada played indy ball in 2003 for a season.

Odd for a guy to be signed who I cannot find a single thing online about.
John Northey - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 05:58 PM EST (#335368) #
Steve Pearce looks like a good idea. Played at 1B/2B/LF/RF/3B last year so not limited. Lifetime pounds LHP (269/353/499) but meh vs RHP (245/322/406). Given he is a free agent without compensation he'd be ideal as he'd only cost money, not picks or prospects. In 2014 he was worth 4.9 fWAR, 2.0 last year but just 0.4 inbetween. Seems decent at 1B but meh to blah at others (postive at 3B, negative in OF, up and down at 2B via UZR/150). He should get a deal in the $8-$10 mil range I'd guess. Entering age 34 season so he'll want years I suspect. Prefer him by a mile over Smoak.
jgadfly - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 06:12 PM EST (#335369) #
Gourriel now on 40 man list ... does Alford also need to go on it or risk Rule 5 ?
SK in NJ - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 06:14 PM EST (#335370) #
No one has suggested that they need to give "Liriano money" to a SP depth option. However, they will need a AAA rotation since none of the pitching prospects in the system are projected to start there, and even getting a 1-2 win starter like Chavez last season cost a good bullpen arm and $4M. The Jays were lucky to have no injuries to the rotation last season, but they were still pretty well prepared with Hutchison, Chavez, and Floyd, which collectively cost about $7-8M and Liam Hendriks. Biagini and Bolsinger is a good start as far as depth, but they'll need to spend at least a little bit to add more, otherwise you're left with the Carmona's and Scott Diamond's of the world.

In 1-2 years when some of the pitching prospects are in AA/AAA, then this discussion will be different, since those are typically the depth SP's in an ideal situation. The Jays are not there yet.
dan gordon - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 06:29 PM EST (#335371) #
Jays are apparently in conversations with the Mets for a possible Jay Bruce trade - no new news there. If Mets can retain Cespedes it gets more likely to happen. Bruce had a good bounce back season going after 2 bad years in a row, but then after the trade to NY he was back to his 2014/15 form. No idea what happened to him those 2 years, and again with the Mets, but it makes me rather uninterested in him at his $13 million price tag. With Morales on the team, they'd have to tolerate his poor defense as well.
Gerry - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 06:53 PM EST (#335372) #
A Felipe Castaneda pitched for Mexico under 15's against the US last year. Because there is nothing on the internet about him I assume he is a 16 year old Mexican pitcher.
uglyone - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 07:12 PM EST (#335373) #
SK the question arose from an argument that we can't be signing big free agents because we have to spend real money on AAA pitchers.

and the idea that having prospects in AAA that aren't good enough for mlb provides good insurance (or better than a AAAA vet) is belied by the fact that those types usually get torched when called up.

Mike Green - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 07:13 PM EST (#335374) #
Bruce has been bad defensively the last 3 years.  With an OBP of around .300 in a good park for a hitter and in a weak division, he's been a below average player for 3 years running.  Pass.
scottt - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 07:39 PM EST (#335375) #
Reddick and Bruce are two candidates to platoon with Upton.
John Northey - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 08:26 PM EST (#335376) #
Hopefully that is him. I think getting guys as young as possible is fantastic especially if the international free agent rules change to a draft situation at 18.
uglyone - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 08:30 PM EST (#335377) #
morales and Bruce combined had the same WAR as saunders last year.

Saunders cost $3m last year. Morales and Bruce cost $24m next year.
dan gordon - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 09:38 PM EST (#335378) #
Bruce's WAR has been all over the map, from 5.3 in 2013 to -1.1 in 2014. His inconsistency is one reason to avoid him.
scottt - Sunday, November 13 2016 @ 11:12 PM EST (#335379) #
Saunders had a reverse split and was bad defensively.
Bruce can be moved to left field and skipped against lefties.
Seems an adequate stopgap measure to me.

The high salary is what makes the trade possible.
The Mets need to free some payroll to overpay Cespedes.
The Jays wouldn't gave much.
John Northey - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 01:53 AM EST (#335380) #
It'd be an expensive platoon but Bruce with Morales would be a killer platoon.
85bluejay - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 06:09 AM EST (#335381) #
Given that this FO likes to mitigate their risk, I don't see Shatkins giving Donaldson the type of contract to keep him here into his late 30's - I expect Donaldson to be moved before he becomes a FA - opportunities begin with the 2017 July trade deadline, depending on whether the team is contending - in this context, the Gurriel deal is very smart as he is likely to be ready for a big league job (3B) within the next year.
Glevin - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 06:37 AM EST (#335382) #
No one expects ten million for a sixth starter but starter depth will probably cost 5-7 (including swingman who spends all year on major league roster). It's not a ton of money, but depth does cost something and is necessary. Both world series teams suffered awful injuries and we're able to replace talent with depth. The Jays were very healthy last year but you can't hope to compete if you have no depth. Stars and scrubs is a fantasy strategy, not a real baseball one.
scottt - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 07:30 AM EST (#335383) #
Last year they gave Gavin Floyd 1M. I'm expecting something similar. The bullpen needs a lefty and that's where the money is likely to go.
SK in NJ - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 07:56 AM EST (#335384) #
The Jays are probably waiting for Bautista to officially decide what he's doing with the QO before they move forward with an outfielder. I think they have real interest in Reddick, but it's a matter of what his contract will look like. A four year deal would cover him from ages 30-33, and he's already seen a bit of a dip in his defense. Bruce turns 30 next season and is only a one year commitment, though he's not as good as Reddick.

My guess is Reddick is the first choice, and Bruce is the back-up option, since they appear ready to take advantage of a platoon with Upton, but it will come down to cost. They obviously like Bruce enough to overlook his defense for whatever reason. Even at his best, Bruce was a 120 wRC+ player, so unless they think he has another gear in him offensively, it seems like a poor target since his defense is terrible.

ayjackson - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 07:57 AM EST (#335385) #
So will Jose accept his QO? Get the feeling that after signing Morales, nothing was going to happen with Edwin until they knew the answer from Jose.

Should be an interesting day. FWIW, I think the computer models are probably correct in projecting Bautista to a 3 WAR next year. I think the decline has begun, but there should be some regression on the pace of that decline.

Interesting tidbit, but signifying nothing, Steamer projects David Ortiz to have a plate appearance this year.
uglyone - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 08:13 AM EST (#335386) #
Over the last 3 seasons, Morales and Bruce have combined for 1.0fwar, total. combined. over three seasons.
Mike Green - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 09:50 AM EST (#335387) #
38 MLB players have been born on November 14.  Surprisingly, you can fill out a major league roster with them and all but one (the second lefty in the pen) have significant major league experience:

C-   Fred  Carisch
1B- Yasmany Tomas
2B- Freddy Galvis
SS- Francisco Lindor
3B- Joe Leonard
LF- Xavier Nady
CF- Jimmy Piersall
RF- Jack Lelivelt

SP- Curt Schilling
SP- Harry Howell
SP- Claude Willoughby
SP- Paul Wagner
SP- Kent Bottenfield

RP- Willie Hernandez
RP- Jim Brewer
RP- Marty Kutyna
RP- Guillermo Moscoso
RP- Joely Rodriguez

Bench- John Munyan (C), Otto Schomberg (LH 1st baseman- good bat), Daniel Casto (Middle IF), Ruben Rivera (4th OF), Clete Thomas (5th OF)

They would probably win 70-75 games, but that's not bad for such a shallow pool of players to choose from- there might end up being two Hall of Famers on the club (assuming the Hall can ignore Schilling's off-field activities).

China fan - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 10:37 AM EST (#335388) #
"....No one has suggested that they need to give "Liriano money" to a SP depth option...."

Well, in fact there was this comment upthread, which triggered the whole debate about SP depth and how much to spend on it:

I still think the Jays should sign Rich Hill. This would give them an excellent and balanced rotation (Sanchez, Stroman, Estrada, Happ, Hill) and allow them to slot Liriano in as the #6 starter who can also pitch out of the 'pen.

92-93 - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 10:45 AM EST (#335389) #
"Over the last 3 seasons, Morales and Bruce have combined for 1.0fwar, total. combined. over three seasons."

Is obfuscating Morales' value going to be your new offseason project, like ignoring the long term implications of Price's deal was last year? Did you really need to lump Bruce, a player the Jays haven't traded for, into the equation to try proving whatever point it is you are trying to make (and I have no idea what it is, because your MO is to state twisted facts that fit your narrative without stating a conclusion)?

It's silly to judge deals like the Morales one without the full context of the offseason, and at the very least this front office did enough last winter that you should be patient and let their plan unfold before criticizing it. We'll start to learn a lot more after today's deadline to accept the qualifying offer; I hope to see Bautista back in blue.
Parker - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 10:50 AM EST (#335390) #
I'd pass on Jay Bruce too unless the Reds are eating all but two or three million of his 2017 salary, and I doubt the Mets want rid of him badly enough to pay him that much to play somewhere else. Bruce can swing a bat, but you wouldn't want him playing in the field at all, unless he shows some promise at 1B. I'm already worried that Gibbons is going to give Morales a significant number of innings in LF. The last thing the Jays need is another solid hitter that will tempt Boomhauer to continue to erase any value at the plate by repeatedly running a guy out to a position he can't field, ie. 2016 Jose Bautista and Michael Saunders.

Can you imagine how good the Jays pitching staff would've been last year without Saunders in left and Bautista in right? I want to believe the front office is smart enough to understand that players like Bruce or Morales only hurt their value in the field, but if they can't get their manager in line, and if the Jays trade for Bruce and re-sign Bautista, Boomhauer is going to have a field day with mind-boggling positional assignments because he's got so many players who can hit 25 HR. And the pitching staff is going to look terrible because their outfield defence is a disgrace.

I'd also like to renew my objections to the "Shatkins/Shapkins/whatever" terminology.

Parker - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 10:53 AM EST (#335391) #
Is obfuscating Morales' value going to be your new offseason project, like ignoring the long term implications of Price's deal was last year? Did you really need to lump Bruce, a player the Jays haven't traded for, into the equation to try proving whatever point it is you are trying to make (and I have no idea what it is, because your MO is to state twisted facts that fit your narrative without stating a conclusion)?

I'm sure it's going to be one of his offseason projects. In case you hadn't noticed, buddy has a ton of free time to work on statistical manipulation.
uglyone - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 10:56 AM EST (#335392) #
"Is obfuscating Morales' value going to be your new offseason project"

1yrs: 0.7fwar 0.9bwar 0.8avg, 0.8avg/yr
2yrs: 2.6fwar, 3.3bwar, 3.0avg, 1.5avg/yr
3yrs: 0.8fwar, 2.3bwar, 1.6avg, 0.8avg/yr

I think i'm clarifying, not obfuscating.

For me, obfuscating would be dismissing war for DHs or talking about 30hrs.
Parker - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 10:59 AM EST (#335393) #
The worst troll is the one who doesn't even know he/she is a troll. Just don't feed em.
uglyone - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 11:26 AM EST (#335394) #
Information is not trolling.

Mocking information, on the other hand, is.
CeeBee - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 11:35 AM EST (#335395) #
Sometimes way too much faith is put into aWar, bWar, cWar and any other war. War, what is it good for.
SK in NJ - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 11:52 AM EST (#335396) #
Bautista is going to reject the QO, per Heyman.

Not surprising.
Mike Green - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 12:17 PM EST (#335397) #
I'm not crazy about the Morales signing, not so much the AAV but the term.  The 3 year contract however may be a reflection of a favourable market for players, given the quality of players available and (perhaps) an increase in the luxury tax threshold in the new CBA.

Are we sure that Morales cannot play first base? The last two years he has been behind Eric Hosmer and has played most of the time when Hosmer had a rare day off.  He has been a decent defensive first baseman over his career. 
China fan - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 12:35 PM EST (#335398) #
"....buddy has a ton of free time...."

Can we please refrain from the personal attacks on people?  No matter how much you disagree with someone, this site will be more pleasant, and accessible to more people, if we can just stick to the baseball debates. 

I understand that people might be miffed by someone's opinion, and might feel that the statistics are being manipulated or whatever, but let's stick to those issues without the personal insults.  If we personalize it, it only discourages the debates that are the lifeblood of this site.
uglyone - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 01:38 PM EST (#335399) #
TBH I'm more insulted by you saying I manipulated the stats than by his basement cracks.
Parker - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 02:02 PM EST (#335400) #
If the basement-dweller was honest, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
uglyone - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 02:07 PM EST (#335401) #
Kendrys was worth less than 1war last year. Has been worth less than 1war per year over the last 3yrs on average. Our only early projection has him at less than 1war next year.

Honest, unadulterated truth, straight from my mom's basement.
ayjackson - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 02:23 PM EST (#335402) #
Combining Bruce's and Morales' last three years' WAR seems like manipulation of a stat to me. I haven't seen you state what you were hoping to accomplish by doing so. It is quite random.
John Northey - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 02:42 PM EST (#335403) #
I think the bottom line is Morales and Bruce are not what I'd call great players. They are placeholders at best who will probably be no better than guys like Smoak are. They all are cheap, will be replacement level (roughly) and easily dumped if better comes along.

I suspect the Jays are trying to keep 1B and the OF open for the kids knowing that is the way to make a championship team. They expect to come up short in 2017 unless everything falls in place. The cost of going for it requires an upgrade in budget by $30-$50 million (keep EE, sign Cespedes, trade for someone else) which also would risk locking in big deals long term.

I hate the idea of writing off 2017 with a token effort to compete and keep viewers coming in but can understand it. In 2 to 3 years we'll have Tellez and other kids up here filling in the holes (I suspect they are hunting down kids they can take while eating contracts right now - a smart way to use an increased budget if you feel you are going to come up short).

2017 will see a strong Boston team, Baltimore will be doing what they can, odds are NYY will spend at some point and Tampa has been consistently good with this year being the exception since they switched from Devil Rays to Rays. The west has a few tough teams (Texas/LAA/Houston) so you can't count on 2 wild cards from the east in 2017.

Bottom line, as always is the bottom line. Jays will increase the budget to keep fans feeling good about the team - I'll guarantee some executives are pushing for a big signing/trade pre-Christmas to boost season ticket sales. But going nuts isn't going to happen unless there is a part of it that helps the long term bottom line. So don't expect Votto unless Cincinnati gives up a quality prospect or two as well. Same with Milwaukee and Braun. I don't think there are other bad contacts the Jays could eat that wouldn't look silly on the roster right now.
uglyone - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 03:06 PM EST (#335404) #
you call it manipulating, I call it playing.

I don't see how it's misleading at all, and I found the comp pretty striking. it scared me, at least.

uglyone - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 03:09 PM EST (#335405) #
As for what the point was....well, I guess it's to bust any myth that these types of signings are any real attempt to replace a guy like EE. As options to replace the limited contributions of guys like Saunders and Joey last year, kinda maybe you can stretch that and see it, but that's as far as a reasonable person could go I think.

And of course the other point would be to show that even value-wise, morales and bruce contracts aren't even necessarily good.
uglyone - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 03:16 PM EST (#335406) #
Longenhagens' (fangraphs) take on Gurriel:
eudaimon - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 04:45 PM EST (#335407) #
Morales is definitely better than a guy like Smoak. At least he has a skill, which is hitting. I don't count being an okay fielding first baseman as a skill, which is pretty much all Smoak has at this point

I think focusing on Morales' WAR is misleading. Not going to get into if that's intentional or whatever. To me, Fangraphs punishes Morales a fair bit because he doesn't often take the field. But I feel like this takes away from what he actually contributes to teams by hitting well. His RC+ over the last two years is about 120 (around what it is for his career, if you exclude his crappy rookie and follow-up season, but include his crappy 2014), which would put him around #48 of the 146 qualified players according to Fangraphs.

Fangraphs penalizes Morales -16.3 for fielding despite him only playing 90 innings in the field, and most of that is the "positional adjustment" from being a DH. I'm not sure how much that -16.3 affects his WAR, so I did a trick that I'll admit is probably an inexact science, by looking at how much the 48th Most Valuable Player was in terms of WAR and making some assumptions from there. The 48th most valuable player on Fangraphs according to WAR was one Edwin Encarnacion, who was worth 3.9 WAR.

So as we can see #48 of 146 is actually pretty good in the WAR category. He's a guy who might get a five year contract worth 25 million per, despite the fact that he's getting older and isn't a great fielder. From this, I would assume that #48 of 146 in RC+ isn't something to scoff at either.

Even if you assume his 110 RC+ in 2016 is the new normal, that would put him at #80 of 146 qualified players. The 80th most valuable guy in WAR was Marcell Ozuna, who was worth 2.4 WAR.

So that brings us to the question of how much being primarily a DH should penalize the batter. I'm not up on the science, but I think it's reasonably possible that it's ... nothing at all. Or very little. Being a DH simply means that Morales provides value in the way he does best, which is by hitting. Other players provide value through taking the field, but that's not Morales' way.

The argument could be made that he "clogs up" the DH spot. But is that really true? Morales can play the field in certain situations, and I expect to see him in the outfield when one of our 2 great groundball pitchers (Stroman and Sanchez, who are the #1 and #5 most groundballingest pitchers according to Fangraphs) take the mound. He could also play some 1B, where Fangraphs actually seems to rank him decently though I am not an expert in fielding stats.

That means that he can play the field enough to give other guys a rest day at DH. I suppose that if a guy needs a prolonged stint at DH due to a specific but not totally debilitating injury Morales might have to take the field more often, thus losing us some value. But it's also true that those guys, more often than not should instead be fully rested or DL'ed so as to let them actually heal.

So, if you believe that there should be no inherent penalty in being a DH, Morales over the last two years has a bat equivalent to the value of a 2.4 and a 3.9 WAR player. If the value of one WAR is 8 million (as it was at some point recently, not sure what is is now) then it's a good deal even if he keeps producing at a 110 RC+ (57.6 million: 2.4 x 8 x 3). At 120 RC+ he'd be worth 93.6 million, though admittedly this is unlikely for a variety of reasons. His contract should still be good from a value perspective (assuming you buy the whole 8 million per WAR thing) as long as he's producing the equivalent of 1.37 WAR per year.

If you do believe he should have a DH penalty, that's totally fair. But how much should it be? I would argue not that much, or certainly not as much as Fangraphs is taking off. His value to them in the last two years has been 1.9 and 0.7, which differs greatly from the 3.9 and 2.4 I found for those players in the same position at WAR as compared to his rating at RC+.

Of course, there should definitely be a DH penalty in terms of how much a team should pay players. Clearly, being a good fielder is a skill and you need to reward that. But whether or you should penalize the player harshly for only contributing via hitting is questionable in my view. Ie: while a team should not be paying Morales based on the 3.9 / 2.4 figures I made up, it might be true that he's actually worth something close to that in real life.

Anyways, I've probably spent way to long on this. In the end, I don't believe the "great conversation" of how to valuate baseball players is over. Just because Fangraphs has decided to subtract -16.3 whatevers because a guy doesn't take the field doesn't mean that it's necessarily correct. But I'd be happy if someone was able to convince me that I'm wrong.
dan gordon - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 05:20 PM EST (#335408) #
Hearing on The Fan that the Jays have offered Cecil a 3 year contract, but no dollar amount mentioned. A couple of sites seem to think he's going to get about $7 million a season. Would expect the Jays might try to get him a little cheaper than that.
John Northey - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 05:30 PM EST (#335409) #
3 years for Cecil sounds a bit long but $7 mil per I can easily see as that is just under 1 WAR a year and it isn't hard to imagine him doing that (over that 3 of the past 4 years, but just 0.3 last year bWAR; fWAR has him over 1 2 of the past 4 years but 0.9 4 years ago and 0.4 last year).

$7 mil sounds like a good deal reading that. 3 years isn't insane, a year more than I'd like to give him but acceptable.
uglyone - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 06:24 PM EST (#335410) #
all good points eudaimon, but remember that in this comp there's no real difference between the dh penalty and saunders or bruce's (or Bautista's) actual defensive value, so the war comparison is still fair.

what hurts morales, actually, is his baserunning. it's such a liability that his moderately above average bat has much of its limited value mitigated further.
scottt - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 06:50 PM EST (#335411) #
I don't know if Morales' running ability is that much worse than Encarnation's.
He's gone from 41 doubles and and 2 triples in 2015 to 24 doubles last year.
Encarnation hit 34 doubles, but had more PAs.
I don't see a huge difference in GDPs or SOs, but Morales doesn't walk as much.

The prediction for for Morales is 0.9 WAR (might include some bad defense). Bruce is 0.6 (certainly includes a lot of bad defense) and Encarnation is 2.3 (yep, he's predicted to fall off a cliff.)

scottt - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 06:53 PM EST (#335412) #
The rumour I saw is that the Jays offerered 3/18 for Cecil. 
Michael - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 07:27 PM EST (#335413) #
Morales at 1B should be fine, when needed. He's above average by UZR for his career there, including above average in the very small sample last year.

Morales in the OF should be very worrying, sort of Cola 2.0.

He's being paid like he's worth 4 wins above replacement over the 3 years of the contract. Is he worth that, maybe.

I'd bet on EE putting up more value next year alone than Morales does in the 3 years, so yeah not a real replacement.
James W - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 07:30 PM EST (#335414) #
Frangraphs BsR stat has Encarnacion at -2.1 last season, and Morales at -5.0.

The worst runners last season were Martinez (DET), -11.4; Cabrera (DET) -10.0; and Ortiz (BOS), -9.9. Morales was 13th worst. (Encarnacion was 41st worst.)
CeeBee - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 07:33 PM EST (#335415) #
If he hit's enough home runs we won't have to worry much about base running.
PeterG - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 07:47 PM EST (#335416) #
Some of what I am seeing here sounds eerily similar to what we saw about Happ at this time last year. Wouldn't it be something if Morales outperforms EE in 2017. It is within the realm of possibility.

Morales is a more than competent DH regardless what WAR has to say. It is clearly wrong in this case. Performance varies so much from one year to another that you can pretty much dismiss most projections as well for Morales, EE or anyone. 5 years for a guy in his mid 30's with a hand, wrist and leg injury history would have beyond stupidity imo.
SK in NJ - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 08:03 PM EST (#335417) #
I'd be fine with Cecil at 3/18 if that's legit. Prior to 2016 he was a 1+ WAR reliever and in 2016 he had a high BABIP and what is likely an unsustainably high HR rate. Relievers are risky, so there's always a chance he falls off completely, but seems like a reasonable chance to take. The peripherals are still there. If they could sign him to that deal before Chapman and Jansen blow the reliever market out the water, it might look better.
PeterG - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 08:17 PM EST (#335419) #
Jays need to add prospects to roster this week to protect from Rule 5. Looking at who is eligible, I would say that Alford, Urena and Rios should definitely be added. Perdomo is a possibility if there is room though I doubt he would be selected. There are sufficient 40 man spots available as in addition to the # of FA's that have come off, it seems that Thole will be non tendered and Barney is 50/50 imo. Any of Colabello, Ceciliani, Burns could also be dismissed if necessary.
Richard S.S. - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 08:45 PM EST (#335420) #
1. Blue Jays G.M. and Scouts know more about players than anyone on this site ever will.
2. Too often on this site Ego takes over and Common Sense gets ignored.
3. No one on this site is right and no one on this site is wrong, live with it.
4. Too much good information comes on this site to belittle the effort it took.

Kendrys Morales could very possibly equal Edwin's numbers. Kendrys hit 27 and 30 HRs in a place where home runs go to die. He should do well in Toronto. He could play at 1st one or two games a week if needed. We don't need any more.
PeterG - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 09:24 PM EST (#335421) #
Casey Lawrence returning to Jays on minor league deal with ST invite per MLBTR
uglyone - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 10:14 PM EST (#335422) #
Current Steamer600 projections (i.e. per 600pa, 200ip, 65ip)

but I pace it to 650pa to be consistent.

3B Donaldson 137wrc+, 6.2war
SS Tulowitzki 106wrc+, 3.8war
C Martin 97wrc+, 3.5war
CF Pillar 91wrc+, 3.0war
2B Travis 96wrc+, 2.3war
LF Pompey 91wrc+, 1.6war
DH Morales 112wrc+, 1.0war
RF Upton 81wrc+, 0.4war
1B Smoak 92wrc+, 0.2war

UT Cola 85wrc+, -0.6war / Tellez 95wrc+, 0.8war
OF Carrera 81wrc+, 0.0war / Ceciliani 84wrc+, 0.2war
IF Goins 66wrc+, -0.1war / Urena 69wrc+, 0.4war
C Thole 70wrc+, 0.4war / Jimenez 63wrc+, 0.6war

SP Stroman 3.68era, 3.9war
SP Liriano 3.92era, 3.1war
SP Sanchez 3.99era, 3.0war
SP Happ 4.15era, 2.7war
SP Estrada 4.67era, 1.8war
SP Bolsinger 4.36era, 2.5war
SP Reid-Foley 5.26era, 0.3war

RP Osuna 3.42era, 0.9war
RP Barnes 3.66era, 0.7war
RP Loup 3.50era, 0.6war
RP Grill 3.82era, 0.5war
RP Tepera 3.91era, 0.4war
RP Biagini 4.10era, 0.3war
RP Schultz 4.27era, 0.2war
RP Girodo 4.37era, 0.0war
uglyone - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 10:22 PM EST (#335423) #
Bautista 128wrc+, 3.1war
Encarnacion 125wrc+, 2.3war
Pearce 111wrc+, 2.2war
Saunders 101wrc+, 1.2war
Bruce 97wrc+, 0.7war
uglyone - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 10:33 PM EST (#335424) #
Reddick 109wrc+, 2.6war
ComebyDeanChance - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 10:47 PM EST (#335425) #
So assuming those who received qualifying offers are signed by other teams, the Blue Jays will have 3 picks between 24 and 34 (24, 33 and 34) in next June's Rule 4 draft. In the supplementary round they would pick behind the Mets (Cespedes) and the Orioles (Trumbo). The 33 and 34 picks would move up one of course, if Cespedes re-signs with the Mets.
scottt - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 11:06 PM EST (#335426) #
Some guy named Devon White tweeted that he's the new AA hitting coach.
scottt - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 11:08 PM EST (#335427) #
Trumbo could also re-sign with the Orioles.
scottt - Monday, November 14 2016 @ 11:41 PM EST (#335428) #
I cringe whenever I see those pitching projections.

Why would Stroman suddenly be better than Sanchez? Oh, I know, It's because Stroman is more likely to hang a breaking ball than to walk a hitter.

Giroda looks about right. Osuna, though? Maybe his shoulder gives up, but I don't see why he'd suddenly turn into Grilli.
If Happ and Estrada are the worse starters on the team we're probably looking at 100 wins. And if Loup could throw 45 innings at 3.5 ERA they wouldn't need to offer 20M to Cecil.

Cola is UT now? He's a DH who can't hit. Negative WAR for sure.
Thole is obviously gone. I don't know if Jimenez gets a shot. I'm all for it. He's got a very small window now.
And where did Barney go?

dan gordon - Tuesday, November 15 2016 @ 04:23 AM EST (#335429) #
Yah, there's a lot of weird numbers in there. Any "system" that projects Mike Bolsinger to be better than Marco Estrada has a serious problem. I see something like that, and I just roll my eyes and ignore the whole thing. You've got to look through the last several years of a player's career, and evaluate how his career is trending, what adjustments you need to make for injuries, etc. and think about what is likely to happen next. You can't just take some numbers and extrapolate.
scottt - Tuesday, November 15 2016 @ 06:29 AM EST (#335430) #
This is the projection system that allowed the Jays to reach the ALS last year, by betting on guys trending badly or simply beating their projections. I always wonder if somebody will offer the moon for Stroman based on that, but I guess not.
Richard S.S. - Tuesday, November 15 2016 @ 07:40 AM EST (#335431) #
Aroldis Chapman will probably sign for $12.0 - $15.0 Million per year over 5-6 years. He might get even more. What makes any one think Brett Cecil will sign for just $6.0 - $7.0 Million over just three years. He's the second-best Lefty Reliever available. Everyone else is basically the Aaron Loup version. Brett Cecil might get $8.0 - $9.0 Million per year over 4 or 5 years. When it gets up there, I'd rather have Chapman.
John Northey - Tuesday, November 15 2016 @ 08:19 AM EST (#335432) #
Richard - that is why I don't see Cecil getting 4-5 years and $9 mil per - because at that point I figure 30 teams would spend the extra to get Chapman. Cecil is the 2nd best left handed reliever but that is like being the 2nd best DH on the Jays last year. The spread from #1 to #2 is massive and the guy who is #2 is not close to #1 but closer to #10 in talent.
uglyone - Tuesday, November 15 2016 @ 08:28 AM EST (#335433) #
Last 3yrs, as SP

Sanchez (24): 41gs, 6.3ip/gs, 74era-, 94fip-, 95xfip-, 4.2awar/32gs
Stroman (26): 56gs, 6.3ip/gs, 91era-, 82fip-, 81xfip-, 3.9awar/32gs
Happ (34): 107gs, 5.7ip/gs, 94era-, 97fip-, 102xfip-, 2.9awar/32gs
Estrada (33): 96gs, 6.1ip/gs, 94era-, 110fip-, 112xfip-, 2.7awar/32gs
Liriano (33): 115gs, 5.8ip/gs, 96era-, 95fip-, 89xfip-, 2.6awar/32gs
Bolsinger (29): 36gs, 5.2ip/gs, 121era-, 110fip-, 97xfip-, 0.7awar/32gs
Jonny German - Tuesday, November 15 2016 @ 08:55 AM EST (#335435) #
Uglyone, I think you have a lot of interesting things to say and I appreciate your contributions on the whole. That said, I'm sure I'm far from the only reader who is too lazy or too dumb to figure out what you're trying to say with the posts where you just dump a wall of stats (and often I don't even know exactly what some of the stats mean. "awar", for instance.)

Is your last post meant to show the Jays starters are really good? Or that Bolsinger is a great 6th starter? Or that Bolsinger is a lousy 6th starter? Or...?
uglyone - Tuesday, November 15 2016 @ 10:10 AM EST (#335437) #
I try my best not to spin the numbers any which way. I'm not trying to prove anything in particular and don't want to read my own bias into the numbers.

In this case, looking at Stro's actual numbers vs his projections does at least seem to indicate that the projections aren't anything unreasonable, or even optimistic, despite what some posters dismissingly think.

as for walls of stats, I do my best to keep only a select few all-encompassing stats. So instead of listing all of strikeouts, walks, and homeruns, I'll use fip and xfip which sums them all up together.

awar is just my average of fipwar and ra9war. I should note that it in every post I use it but sometimes I forget to.

I do wish the reactions to statistical projections weren't just "they're all crap because they don't agree with my personal opinion", instead of "here's some information I may not have considered', but hey, it is what it is.

As for Bolsinger, that does seem like an eye popping projection. I should reiterate that the actual projection only has him making 8 starts this year, but that doesn't really change the performance level. At least, it seems like Bolsinger is good AAA option, though that doesn't mean he won't suck, either.

I think of all those stats, though, my biggest concern is that at the moment our 3 worst projected starting position players are Morales, Smoak, and Upton, who cost $20m and look barely over replacement level.
John Northey - Tuesday, November 15 2016 @ 12:47 PM EST (#335446) #
Agreed Uglyone. Smoak made little sense to me at the time of the extension and less sense as time goes by. Upton was a reasonable risk to take given how much the Jays are paying him (reasonable amount for a 4th outfielder). Morales I'm looking at as 'hrm, why was this done unless the Jay scouts like something about him at the dome'.

As to the rotation, I love our top 5 (Sanchez & Stroman could be a killer 1/2 punch at the top for a full season). If Boslinger can be a solid #6 the Jays are in good shape assuming reasonably good health (always a risk with pitchers).

Parker - Tuesday, November 15 2016 @ 08:38 PM EST (#335469) #
as for walls of stats, I do my best to keep only a select few all-encompassing stats.

Finally, an admission of selective bias. It's only been four years.

my biggest concern is that at the moment our 3 worst projected starting position players are Morales, Smoak, and Upton, who cost $20m and look barely over replacement level.

Maybe when Upton and Morales produce less value than Carrera and Pompey, someone will offer you a job in baseball.
uglyone - Wednesday, November 16 2016 @ 11:28 AM EST (#335485) #
selective bias? Sure, if i'm biased against listing every single stat available.

and pompey and carrera have already been better values than those 2.
PeterG - Wednesday, November 16 2016 @ 03:10 PM EST (#335499) #
I see Biagini as #6 beginning the season in Buffalo as a starter, barring injury to any of top 5. I expect Bolsinger to be long man in TO as long as he earns it in ST. He will get a long look as he has no remaining options.
ComebyDeanChance - Wednesday, November 16 2016 @ 04:40 PM EST (#335511) #
Can we please refrain from the personal attacks on people?

Whaddy'a be talkin' about "personal attacks"? Parker obviously comes from da Rock too, and there calling someone "Buddy" is second nature. We be callin' everybody 'Buddy'. "Buddy gotta dime? "Buddy Wasisname". Now, if by chance, you come by ComebyChance, you be hearing everybody calling everybody 'buddy'. Even the come-from-awayers doin' it.

And when Parker says Buddy has a lot of free time, that's no personal attack. He's simply noting that Buddy doesn't have the kind of other demands on his time that would prevent him, and the other feller Aunty-Rogers, from leading the annual gripe-and-moan about all those great free agent contracts we could be signing. No personal attack at all
Parker - Wednesday, November 16 2016 @ 05:26 PM EST (#335513) #
Ahahahaha. Dean, you're the best.

Anyhoo. For the record, I grew up in Mississauga.

Calgary is home for me now, but I work in northern Alberta and a bunch of the guys on our crew are from da Rock. The way those by's talk might have rubbed off on me. :)
acepinball - Wednesday, November 16 2016 @ 08:32 PM EST (#335528) #
Long time reader, occasional poster. Though I first read this website when I was growing up in Saskatchewan, I relocated to Newfoundland a few years ago. Kicking myself that I didn't immediately make the connection to ComeByDeanChance my first time 'round the bay.
Parker - Thursday, November 17 2016 @ 10:13 AM EST (#335537) #
Somehow I missed the reference too, and I've worked with nine of these by's on four different contracts who cut their teeth with North Atlantic Refining at the Come By Chance refinery.

Oh me nerves. Ye got me drove, me son!
Attendance vs Wins | 292 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.