Bluebird Banter Trade Deadline Roundtable, Part I
Hugo: Hi, everyone, and welcome to Bluebird Banter's trade-deadline roundtable! It would be great if you could all introduce yourselves briefly, for any new readers. I'm Hugo, I write from Washington D.C., where Mrs. Hugo, our 2-year-old daughter, and I catch as many Jays-Nationals and Jays-Orioles games as possible.
Jesse: I'm Jesse and I live in New Jersey. I'm not married so I try to brave the traffic to make it to Blue Jays games at Yankee Stadium whenever possible, though the cost of tickets is somewhat prohibitive in 2009, I am looking forward to a September game I have tickets to.
JohnnyG: I'm John and I live in London, Ontario. I am married and I have two beautiful baby twin girls that just turned 1 on the 4th of July. London is about 2 hours from Toronto so going to the games is a possibility however costs and life issues tend to get in the way and I am not sure if I am going to make it to one this year. Luckily being in the Toronto Region I get all 162 games from the Jays televised whether it is on TSN, Sportsnet or the Rogers Preview Channel. I also just want to thank Hugo, Tom and Jesse for inviting me to join in on this discussion. It means a lot so thank you.
Hugo: Thanks to you all for your very kind participation.
Hugo: The Jays are caught in a bit of an awkward situation this trade deadline. The team has made some progress this season, with some young players really stepping up and some veterans playing beyond expectations, but ultimately the results haven't been there yet. What does that mean for the team going forward? Is it time to blow the team up and start over, or should the Jays be looking to retool for a run in 2010?
Jesse: I agree with Tom. I don't see a reason why this team can't make a good run in 2010. That doesn't mean there aren't questions for next year, but I don't see the point in blowing up a team that really isn't all that bad.
JohnnyG: I like the look of the team going forward with Marcum and Litsch and (hopefully) McGowan returning. Even if Halladay were to leave via trade I don't think that means it is time for a full blow up of the team. Rolen is awesome but as Tom said he value has never been higher, same with Frasor. Bullpen guys can be found easily enough just look at us this year, who would of thought that Hayhurst would be an effective reliever. Bottom Line, The Jays should look to retool for the upcoming years, not just 2010, but that does not necessarily mean blow it up, they have plenty of good starting pieces already. I am of the mind that while I have the greatest of optimism for 2010, that does not necessarily mean that I think we will be good enough next year. Again that doesn't mean blow it up, but re-tooling can be for 2010 through 2012.
Hugo: Here's a big one - should the Jays be looking to trade Roy Halladay? If so, what should they be looking to get in return?
Jesse: Unless someone really blows them away with an offer, I don't think they should make a deal until at least around the All Star Break next season. The first reason I prefer a midseason deal is because the Jays can opt not to trade him if they are playing well, whereas if they trade him in the offseason and play well, we will be stuck thinking about what if we hadn't traded him (ditto for trading him now). The second reason I prefer trading him during the season to making an offseason deal is that Halladay is going to be the type of upgrade that will make good teams great -- those upgrades can be had during the offseason (even if it means upgrading at multiple positions) but are few and far between mid-season.
Hugo: Assuming the Jays do make a trade, who or what should they be targeting in return? Be as specific or as general as you want.
JohnnyG: Didn't we kinda go over this is the last question? Unless you mean just in general for trade targets. In that case I think it is remarkable similar. The Jays should be looking to add a couple of younger high level prospects, preferably shortstop, 3B and 1B, At least one should be a power type hitter. The problem being of course that this is fairly common knowledge of where the team lacks depth and other teams don't exactly give up top prospects for nothing. Of course a team can never have too much pitching despite what some commentators on TSN.ca and Sportsnet.ca will say. The Jays' depth on the pitching staff was needed this year.
Hugo: I agree - young position players are really what the team needs - there is a real dearth of them in the Jays' system.
Tom: I guess the other question is what we do about the catchers spot, do we hope that Arencibia will be good enough to play for the team next year? Do we sign Rod Barajas for another year to have him share with Arencibia. The problem then, with Cito as manager, Arencibia won't play. I guess we could go the rest of the year and see if Arencibia develops, but if we made our trades now and don't pick up a catcher, we could be in an interesting spot. Would he be that much worse than Barajas?
JohnnyG: Barajas has worked out wonderfully for us, but I am not sure Arencibia will be ready next year. I wouldn't be opposed to signing Barajas for another year. There are a couple of free agents that should be low cost to slot into a backup / competition spot with Barajas. Kendall, Redmond from the Twins and both Benji and Jose Molina will be available next year although I am not sure Benji would be cheap considering he has had a couple of decent seasons with the Giants.
Hugo: Great point. I think the thing to do is offer Rod a very similar deal to his current one - another 1-year deal with an option, with a modest raise from his last contract. That way we have Rod start next season as the starter and Arencibia hopefully take the job by the end of the season, after which point we can decide whether it is worth it to bring Rod back or not. If Rod turns it down, we can offer a similar veteran catcher the same deal. That way we cover ourselves if Arencibia doesn't develop as quickly as some of us are hoping. If Arencibia explodes out of the gate, so what - you have a slightly overpaid backup in Barajas for 2010 and then you don't exercise the option.
Tom: I guess Rod isn't impressing me much at the moment, I know he has a bad leg, but his numbers are .252/.286/.405, not exactly impressive. He is a streak hitter and could go on a great run and bring his numbers up to something decent but his slumps are so deep.
JohnnyG: He is very streaky, but I still think it would be a better option then having Arencibia in the majors next year, The guy seems overmatched this year in AAA so I don't think he is ready at all. In addition I would add that if the team itself is not sold on Barajas (which I don't think is the case. I think the Jays are high on Barajas with his work with the pitchers and general feel with the team) there are other similar veteran catchers available starting next year.
Hugo: Join us next time for Part II, and of course add your own thoughts in the comments!
0 recs |
65 comments
|
Comments
I can't see us trading Rolen
All the top 3B prospects either have the stupid untouchable label or play for teams that need to develop their own talent, and all the free agent 3Bs to be are worse than Rolen, and in Figgins’ case might cost us a first round draft pick.
They're not just hitting home runs. They're doing the little things, like hitting doubles.
by Torgen on Jul 16, 2009 8:34 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
And you don't want to trade for a SS prospect you'll have to slide to third
You want the team that has him to slide him to third, then trade for him so the cost is lower.
They're not just hitting home runs. They're doing the little things, like hitting doubles.
by Torgen on Jul 16, 2009 8:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Just curious why it costs us a first round pick? Must have missed something.
by BigTimeBlueJayFan on Jul 16, 2009 11:45 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
because he will be a type A free agent
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
by hugo on Jul 17, 2009 6:49 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jays are competitive ...
… but there are a couple of holes.
Pitching, when healthy, is probably adequate, if not overstaffed, to lead the team to contention. I believe this applies to both starting and relief.
At 3B Jays are strong with Rolen, but he is getting older and may soon retire. If he retires as a Jay, that is fine, but the Jays need to start planning for a replacement. At SS, Scutaro is a good lead-off batter and fielder. As with Rolen, retirement issues loom for Scutaro. At 2B, Jays are solid with Hill. At 1B, Jays need to improve either with a replacement or Overbay needs to rid himself of the long periods of hitlessness. Overbay’s defense and hitting, when he is on, are fine, but the multi-game hitless streaks are just too costly in the MLB.
RF, CF and DH are fine, assuming they are not slumping (see comments on multi-game hitlessness above). LF, if Snider does not come back, needs to be filled.
Jays need to re-sign Rod, IMHO, as Arencibia does not appear to be working out. I would like to see Philips look to convert to catcher as his bat, again IMHO, does not offer adequate slugging power to make it in the majors as a 1B.
The Jays have a surplus of pitching. Trade is about leveraging comparative advantage among entities with complementary strengths. As the Jays need position players, they need to leverage their comparative advantage in pitching with a team that offers comparative advantage in fielding positions. This can be achieved by trading either Halladay or pitching prospects. It is a tough spot for JP, but I give Roy the option.
If Jays do have to trade Halladay, I would like to see if the VW contract can be moved. This is not really a commentary on VW, but moreso on the excess of the contract. Jays could engage two, maybe three quality players for that contract.
I agree with the contention, raised in the round table, that the Jays do not need to be blown up. There are some modest tweaks necessary but the Jays can win. Bo Sox and Yanks are hardly impenetrable barriers of competitiveness. The Jays can hold their own versus either. A few more subtle adjustments, could ensure that the Jays do it on a more regular basis.
by aagoodfella on Jul 16, 2009 9:17 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
It would be interesting to have audio recordings of these roundtables to listen to at work so I can be working and thinking about the Jays. Just a thought. Interesting idea.
I have some thoughts:
1) If Halladay goes this year I think Wells needs to go somehow. If Halladay goes we are essentially saying next year we are not going to go for it. In that regard we are really rebuilding for the years after that and I don’t see how Wells and his contract fit into that. That being said, we lose some value in trading Halladay with Wells.
2) Everyone is talking trade for Halladay but I would like to talk about signing him long term and how we do that. I think it needs to involve Vernon. If I was Vernon and had a chance to play on the same team as the best pitcher on the planet and maybe have a chance to win, then I would highly consider restructuring my contract. It takes a real special person to do that, but I would love to see it happen here. Vernon must realize his contract hurts this team. And, maybe it would take the pressure off Vernon and he might perform better.
3) Going into this year I figured all we needed was another starter if the hitters actually hit, which they have been doing at certain points. Extrapolating to next year I could see myself saying the same thing. So maybe we can trade Vernon to a contender for a player who isn’t doing very well either. Perhaps that play but also costs a lot but maybe for not as many years as Vernon and maybe Arnsberg can turn that pitcher around. Perhaps Dontrelle Willis is that guy. The tigers could use another hitter and Willis is earning 10 million next year and he sucks. Maybe we can ship off Mills or Purcey or someone else too. It would be like cutting your losses partially and hoping someone needs another bat for the post-season run and willing to pay a bit of a premium price. Maybe there will be a big injury to one of the top outfielders on LA, BOS or NYY and they’ll come calling. It would be a bit of gamble. Then we can sign another outfielder or DH in the offseason to a one or two year deal. If the first half of next year doesn’t go well, trade Halladay.
4) The worst thing that could happen is that the Jays don’t trade Halladay and he either gets injured or he has a poor start to next season. The trade value is super high right now. So if we think 2010 is not really a real good chance at success, trade him now. I can’t believe I just said that though. I have always hoped that Halladay would be a lifer with the Jays. I just want to see a player play their entire career with Toronto and go to the Hall of Fame wearing the Jays cap. I like watching this guy every five days and because of him I can put up with sub-par seasons. Ever since I watched his near no-hitter live against Detroit from behind the plate I was hooked. Damn Bobby Higginson.
by BigTimeBlueJayFan on Jul 16, 2009 11:44 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Meant to say one more thing. Do you think a player would consider adding an extra year to his contract for no extra money? Wells makes his seven year contract into an eight year contract and then backend loads it? I am probably dreaming. The way Vernon is going it might give him more time at the end of his contract to play better to get a new one.
by BigTimeBlueJayFan on Jul 16, 2009 11:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think that it’s nice to hope that players are going to set up and help the organization, but
a) I’m not sure many players would
b) I highly doubt the player’s association would allow him to do anything like that.
by toonsterwu on Jul 17, 2009 12:59 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Take a look a look at what Drew – LtB said on ghost runner on first. Here and Here.
It is a nice thought but not something that I think would ever happen. I would never work for a year without any extra pay. I know that isn’t what your suggesting, but rather add a year and spread out the money, but since Wells is being paid that money over 5 years anyhow it would be like working an extra year with no pay.
'But I don't want to go among mad people' Alice remarked.
'Oh, you can't help that' said the Cat 'we're all mad here'.
by JohnnyG on Jul 17, 2009 7:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
and as you pointed out
would you do that so that your co-worker could be kept on by your company?
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
by hugo on Jul 17, 2009 7:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes. I would because sometimes the success of the team depends on everyone. Essentially this is what happens when the company refuses to raise everyone’s salary and only raises certain salaries. It’s on a smaller scale though but it happens all the time. The baseball players aren’t paid like normal people though. They are guaranteed all that money the moment they sign which is ridiculous when you think about it. But yeah, if I had the option of having my company suck and me possibly losing my job later or taking less money to keep some other people around to help build the company, then I would do the latter. Otherwise I might be out of luck too.
by BigTimeBlueJayFan on Jul 17, 2009 11:33 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes but in this case it wouldn’t be a matter of losing your job later.
This may be Wells last contract or it may not be. Your asking him to extend for nothing?
You have got to be the first person I have ever met who would agree to work for nothing.
If the situation was that Rogers needed to go to Wells to re-structure his contract otherwise the team would fold and he wouldn’t get paid then maybe you may have an argument. But in this case it is more along the lines of asking someone to take less pay so they can hire a co-worker which may make the workplace a better place to work, but in the end has no bearing on whether the company lives or folds.
'But I don't want to go among mad people' Alice remarked.
'Oh, you can't help that' said the Cat 'we're all mad here'.
by JohnnyG on Jul 17, 2009 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
the other thing is that it appears that the team has absolutely no interest in adding payroll, regardless of what Wells does. Quite the contrary. Any forgoing salary on his part would likely just result in a windfall to the team when the dust had cleared.
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
by hugo on Jul 17, 2009 11:48 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
yep, it is not realistic to ask players to restructure contracts
although apparently it is ok for NFL players to ask their teams to restructure contracts - never really understood that too much
by aagoodfella on Jul 17, 2009 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
the NFL players
can get cut and have their contracts voided if they refuse
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
by hugo on Jul 17, 2009 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
you mean when the players hold out at training camps every year, the team could just void the player contract?
is that based on breach of contract common law?
also, if the team did void the player contract, how does that affect the player’s eligibility to sign with another team and/or the original team’s entitlement to compensation? (like I said, I never really understood this NFL holdout system and its legality)
by aagoodfella on Jul 17, 2009 6:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
the contracts aren't guaranteed
so the team can end them for any reason at any time
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
by hugo on Jul 17, 2009 6:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is a strange thing the NFL does....
Always wondered…it really is just a one way contract, you promise to play for us and we pay you, but we can decide that we don’t want you anymore at anytime and you don’t get paid.
by Tom Dakers on Jul 17, 2009 11:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's why the players can hold out
and fans don’t hold it against them.
When baseball players hold out, the fans don’t let them forget it (and they shouldn’t).
"Look at me! I'm Tomokazu Ohka of the Montreal Expos!"
by jessef on Jul 17, 2009 11:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
that explains the NFL holdout phenomenon
…. plus, I figure an NFL player’s career is a bit more tentative due to higher risk of injury … so it is more imperative that they cash in during the good years, which may be brief due to no fault of their own
i think the MLB should look at backing away from guaranteed contracts, no-trade clauses and implement a cap ( i think the cap has been great for NFL leading to parity and small mkt competitiveness and I like the way it is shaping up in the NHL so far )
by aagoodfella on Jul 18, 2009 1:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
only Detroit Red Wings players make those kind of sacrifices
by aagoodfella on Jul 17, 2009 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Volunteers work for nothing except the love of what they are doing; like Brandy Halladay collecting food. Although I kinda had to smile when she said she was trying to raise $25,000. I think Halladay earns double that per inning.
Wells is getting 121 million dollars to play baseball or as they would say in Britain 175 000 pounds per week! I am sure he can play a year extra for his 121 million. No one needs 121 million dollars to survive. If I was guaranteed to make 121 million and I enjoyed what I was doing and who I was working with and needed to work a year for free to be more successful then that is what I would do. Some CEOs do just that. They believe in their company and they’ve earned their money so their salaries are $1 for the year.
I love baseball, but it’s economics are sorely messed up. If it wasn’t for all the interesting things that happen during a regular season it’d be real tough on the fans of the teams that rarely make the playoffs. Fortunately the regular season satisfies and when the Jays finally do make the playoffs again it will be so exciting from all the years of built up anticipation.
by BigTimeBlueJayFan on Jul 18, 2009 2:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes Their Salarys are for 1$ per yer, but you neglect to mention that in those spots they are earning millions and millions in stock options.
I stand by my point that if you are being paid to do a paying job (Volunteers/Charitys don’t count because that is a whole other beast altogether) that you will never do it for free.
People that have a lot of money often just want to increase it, via investments or extra work, but this is devolving into a psych conversation and I think we have verred off course.
I just don’t think Wells would do it, and you mentioned that you doubt it either so it is all mute point.
'But I don't want to go among mad people' Alice remarked.
'Oh, you can't help that' said the Cat 'we're all mad here'.
by JohnnyG on Jul 18, 2009 9:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
As far as I can see to refine the team and help out we have 3 options, baring key injury to a playoff team. Halliday Wells Rios. Which of the 3 can we deal with losing the most? Some might say add Rolen and or Overbay. Rolen is good and I like him but I dont think too many teams are willing to take that contract on. Overbay doesnt have the pop for first and well he has to know Cooper is coming up and will fill the exact same roll so…
Given that choice I would have to go with Wells or Rios. Our pitching is deep but I think that all is a part of what Doc brings to the table. Talent is talent however like alot of the greats they make those around them better and Doc does that we need him. If we have to part with one of my favourites I say Wells or Rios.
by Jarrman on Jul 17, 2009 12:50 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I do not think you can move the Wells contract on a standalone basis. There are only a handful of teams that could burden that contract and they would not take that contract unless they got something else. Really, Halladay probably offers the Jays the only way to move the Wells contract by packaging Halladay and Wells together. However, even if you tried to do that, you would need both Halladay and Wells to waive their no-trade clauses. This might be hard to do. At best, it is a long shot, but I think with the Halladay situation as it is now, this may be a very rare op for the Jays to slip out of the Wells contract.
Rios’ contract is a little more realistic, and thus, a lesser priority IMHO.
by aagoodfella on Jul 17, 2009 2:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you really think Halladay wants to be traded to a team along with Vernon Wells, one of the causes of him not winning in Toronto?
by BigTimeBlueJayFan on Jul 18, 2009 2:21 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
As an outsider, I believe it’s time for the Blue Jays to rebuild. The situation in the AL East is just too difficult – they tried spending to keep up with the big boys, but now they are hurt by the contracts. The system isn’t strong enough, and there are already 3 superior teams in the AL East. Hey, if they were in the AL Central, they’d be in it. Luck of the draw (sorta). The Orioles have a loaded team coming up and are closer than people think from a surprise season. Probably 2011 is more realistic, but they are talented. I think the Blue Jays system is alright, but it’s probably in the end of the 2nd tier or the third tier of systems. Just enough chips in place.
Before I forget, I always liked Skydome, Rogers, whatever it’s called now. Went there when I was in 7th grade and then went back again a few years ago. It’s a comfortable stadium, one that doesn’t really get the respect that it ought to, imo.
It’s tough to white flag it, but really, everything has to go right for the Blue Jays current core to compete in 2010 AND you have to hope that the top 3 teams in the AL East all go through big issues. That just seems unlikely. I’m not one to believe that building .500ish, 83-87 win teams year in and year out is anything worth celebrating.
Doc Halladay’s value is best right now. If you could rate a trade’s return on a 1-5 scale, I think most Blue Jays fans believe that they shouldn’t take a deal unless it’s a 5, a home run, knock your socks off, change the system type deal. I’m not suggesting you take a 3, which might be a good deal. But if a plus deal comes along, I think you pull the trigger. The chances of a high return is best now, as you can bring in some teams that might not have any thought about resigning him as of now, but are simply gunning for the short term since they control him for that extra time. It’s not impossible, but with teams overprotecting their prospects these days. I think the Phillies have be the favorite, but certainly some darkhorses exist. I’m not really sold the Phillies will say, offer Drabek/Taylor/Brown/Donald to make a deal happen, but 2 out of the 4 might be possible, and maybe 3. Halladay should be a standalone trade, and not a salary relief deal, as you need the talent first and foremost, and any salary relief considerations, in this economy, would likely bring down the return.
I think you shop Rolen now. He’s not going to be a part of the core of the next great Toronto squad, and his value is best now as well. See what you can net. Same with Overbay. Clearing his salary would be nice. I wouldn’t expect much. Dealing Vernon would be a dream move for you guys, but honestly, I don’t see it happen. Certainly, though, clearing more salary would be nice, and I’d shop Alex Rios. I don’t know if any team is simply going to take on the salary, though, so the Blue Jays might have to eat some of it. Not sure.
White flagging is never fun, but honestly, are .500-ish seasons all that exciting after awhile? I’d tear it down and try to build it back up.
by toonsterwu on Jul 17, 2009 1:14 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Have to agree
It seems like now is the time, when will all the aforementioned players trade value be higher. It is not realistic to compete with the rest of the al east with our current talent level at some positions. I am a huge jay fan but honestly now is the time not that we wanted to here that.
by canadiancolts on Jul 17, 2009 3:06 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
I agree. Rogers center is very comfortable and I like it very much. Some folks back on it, but I think their criticism is unwarranted. The seating is comfortable, the views unobstructed (Fenway is romantic but it is hard to watch through a pillar) and the amenities are modern and clean.
The Jays do not need to rebuild. The Jays have lots of good players, good pitching and great pitching prospects. In fact, the Jays have an excess of pitching talent. The Jays need to swap out some pitching talent for talented field positions, as a SUPPLEMENT TO not a REPLACEMENT FOR what they have now. At this time, the Jays need to add-on not rebuild.
The Jays do not need to compromise on a Doc trade. They can get a good deal that benefits the Jays, the trading team and Halladay’s ambition to achieve a WS.
by aagoodfella on Jul 17, 2009 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I get it
fans want to believe.
Just curious, who are these great pitching prospects? Maybe you are using a different definition of prospect. I’m going by guys that haven’t met rookie standard for MLB.
Cecil’s going to be off that list, barring an odd surprise. I’m not sure I’d go so far to call Brad Mills a great pitching prospect. Good, yes. Maybe that’s nitpicking. Marc Rzepczyinski is intriguing, as is Luis Perez, but neither seem like an elite category pitching prospect to me. Jenkins, Paxton, Eliopoulos, and Barrett would certainly add to the depth if they are signed.
Could be simply an issue of semantics, but I’m not sure I see great pitching prospects in the system right now. Couple solid guys, some upside guys. Could be really nice in a couple years.
by toonsterwu on Jul 17, 2009 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There are at least three complex issues to solve, looking at the roster
First, Wells and Rios. If their numbers don’t go up, their contracts must be looked at and very carefully in the offseason. With that much money, the team could sign quite a few players. Second, Rolen and Halladay are the toughest issues. Scutaro certainly has more to give to the club and the same is true for Overbay, I feel. Yet, the second needs to settle down and being more steady. In general, as far as adding players, I would split 50-50 the acquisitions between position players and pitchers but the first could very well be the majority, nobody would object to such a choice in my opinion. Very interesting topic.
by Marco1978 on Jul 17, 2009 9:22 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
We can look at their contracts all we want. It isn’t like they are going to go away. It’s doubtful any team (even the Yankees) would take on Well’s contract for anything significant (hey, they may be rich but they aren’t stupid). So there really isn’t much we could do.
We could wish we had that money to play with but really it doesn’t mean anything.
'But I don't want to go among mad people' Alice remarked.
'Oh, you can't help that' said the Cat 'we're all mad here'.
by JohnnyG on Jul 17, 2009 9:25 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
While I don’t think Wells is going anywhere, I do think in the right situation, you could probably ship off Alex Rios. It’d take something very unappetizing from Blue Jays fans, although it would probably net some quality talent in return. For example, I’d offer the idea (not saying I’d do it) of packaging Hill and Rios together to try and clear Hill’s contract. It may require you to take back a short term bad contract, but you’d probably be able to save while net some quality talent. (just for clarity’s sake, I’m not saying you should make any deal simply to clear Rios … if you are going to go the route of packaging Rios with someone else, you still need to ensure that you get solid talent in return).
Contemplating the markets for Rolen and Overbay, and I’m at a loss of who might go after either. That makes me think it’d be better to hold off on Rolen until the offseason. I don’t think Overbay will ever generate much of a market, so the intent in that deal would be to clear his salary and that can be done now or later.
But in the Rolen case, I don’t see much of a market right now for 3rd basemen, barring some injury that emerges. I look at maybe San Francisco, but then again, they’d probably prefer to keep Pablo Sandoval there. There’s the Marlins, but that would likely have to involve a third team. Personally, I think the White Sox would be smart to try and add someone like Rolen, shifting Gordon Beckham to 2nd, but I don’t really think they’ll contemplate it. Teams like the Twins and Astros have limited assets and may be better off pursuing help elsewhere. Reds have been mentioned, but they have to stick around first. All it takes is 2 teams to create a market, though.
by toonsterwu on Jul 17, 2009 9:43 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
holy criminy ... YOU MUST BE A YANKEE
determined to destroy this team
by aagoodfella on Jul 17, 2009 1:12 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My only opinion on trades.....
is that you can get equilalent value for average and good players, but you cannot for great players. 90% of the time the team that gets the top line player gets a much better deal than the team that recieved the 3 or 4 players.
For that reason alone I would not consider trading Halladay. When you also add his value as a team player and leader, he should be the face of the franchise. Why not trade the young pitching prospects for young hitting prospects, one for one?
It is hard to understand that before the Jays had to start 5 rookies this year, they had the best record in the AL, but two months later there is discussion of blowing it up. If Richmond comes back and pitches the way he did earlier in the year, the Jays could go on a long winning streak right now, say 15-5. If other teams now start losing pitchers to injury, the Jays could be back in the wild card race.
by Chesapeake Ron on Jul 17, 2009 10:04 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
to be fair
at that point in time, when the BJ’s were on top, several teams, like the Yankees and Rays, were underachieving. Furthermore, several Blue Jays were, based on past record, still overachieving. Certainly, it’s possible that guys have career seasons or suddenly find a next switch. But therein lies the rub – for the Blue Jays to contend, they need a lot of things to go right for them AND they need other teams to all falter and stay down. That’s a tough cocktail to mix together.
by toonsterwu on Jul 17, 2009 10:38 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok Scoot was overachieving and so was Millar and Bautista… but were the rest of the guys? Overbay was doing great in a platoon role and Lind and Hill haven’t slowed down THAT much, were they overachieving or breaking out?
One could also argue that the Blue Jays were on top when their supposed top two position players are having quite a down year.
'But I don't want to go among mad people' Alice remarked.
'Oh, you can't help that' said the Cat 'we're all mad here'.
by JohnnyG on Jul 17, 2009 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
overachieving, career years and breakouts
are all fairly close things, depending on the prism one views it in. For example, is Ricky Romero breaking out, is he having a career year, or is he overachieving (as some statistical measures would suggest)? The point was that, for the current Blue Jays core to contend, it is my belief that a lot of things have to go right for them and their competitors all have to have consistent, extended struggles.
As an aside, at some point, the poor trends for a guy like Rios and the consistent inconsistency of Wells offensively has to be factored as a part of the assessment, rather than “their supposed two position players are having a down year”. I know you threw a supposed in there, but after all these years, a fairly clear picture of who Wells and Rios are offensively is there now, and that’s consistent inconsistency and/or poor trends.
by toonsterwu on Jul 17, 2009 11:23 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I must be mistaken, I thought Wells was our best hitter last year with a injury shortened season and had you projected his numbers out over a full season he would have hit over 30HR and approx 110 RBIS….. oh wait. That’s true.
'But I don't want to go among mad people' Alice remarked.
'Oh, you can't help that' said the Cat 'we're all mad here'.
by JohnnyG on Jul 17, 2009 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
how does that challenge anything i've noted on Wells
It’s actually quite relevant to my pointOkay, great year last year. Let’s go back the year before in 07. Okay, great year in 06. Let’s go back a year before that to 05. Consistently, he’s shown, over the last four years, that there is consistent inconsistency in his performance. Can he find a balance? A this stage of his career, it seems unlikely. Okay, there’s the whole BABIP argument, a bit of bad luck. Too lazy to dig further beyond that for now. But here’s a guy who has sported a career .280ish BABIP.
Again, I’m not saying guys can’t have a great year here or there. I’m saying that, when it comes to expectations on Rios and Wells offense, maybe it’s time to temper them a bit because of their recent history.
by toonsterwu on Jul 17, 2009 12:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
it won't be an easier mix
in three or four years
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
by hugo on Jul 17, 2009 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
the question would be
Is it good enough to simply go through some decent seasons, probably no playoffs with this current core?
by toonsterwu on Jul 17, 2009 11:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
no, that would not be the question
you don’t trade away pieces just because you’re not going to win now. That’s what dumb teams do. You trade away pieces because what you get for them will help you win in the future. So the question is, would the return be likely to significantly improve the team’s fortunes going forward?
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
by hugo on Jul 17, 2009 11:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
you could substitute
“dumb or cheap” for “dumb” there
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
by hugo on Jul 17, 2009 11:28 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
disagree and
There’s a huge factor that goes beyond the talent, which is the domino effect that comes from the situation at hand, with high bills and an inconsistent squad. Of course I’m not suggesting you sell haphazardly. I should’ve added the talent aspect in my original post but I was in a rush. But there is a domino effect that has shown itself in stagnant organizations, whether we look at non-profits, big corporations, governments, school boards, and the sort, including baseball organizations.
I guess,let me put it in another way that I sort of referenced above. If going for the home run trade (using a random 1-5 scale, with a 5 as a superb return) means you can’t deal and you pass up on, say, a “4” of a deal, then I think that’s a very flawed procedure for the Blue Jays to operate by, with the current state of the franchise. The team needs to be proactive in redesigning itself, particularly since in discussing trades, there is very little that is certain since you are largely trading for prospects.
But that’s me. To be honest, I think Ricciardi will settle a bit. No, he won’t take bad deal on Halladay, but I think a good deal, perhaps not a home run deal, but a good solid deal, perhaps netting two plus assets, a major league piece (role player type), and a high upside kid and he’ll agree.
Speaking on Halladay for a moment, rather than all this talk about 4 quality prospects, I’d focus on the best possible talent because simply put, no team in this day and age is likely (not going to say definitely, because you never know, but I doubt it) to fork over 4 top prospects for anyone where those 4 top prospects are all well-regarded. For example of all the names that have briefly, in one shape or form, been bandied about in Halladay rumors, there’s only one that intrigues (certainly, it was just a quick blurb that I saw) and that would be Gordon Beckham. If you could net Beckham, I’d take a couple lower level upside guys to balance out a deal. That said, I think the Beckham thing was quickly refuted, though I dont’ know exactly.
by toonsterwu on Jul 17, 2009 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think I said anything about a "home run" trade
the point is that as of 2 1/2 weeks ago, the team’s plan was to compete in 2010, if not this year. Now, 3 weeks later, we’re prepared to dynamite the team for the next three years? A team that does things like that isn’t improving, they’re just overreacting. Either that or they’re just shedding salary for the sake of shedding salary and won’t be going anywhere fast.
If the Jays want to rebuild, they need to bring in a new GM with an actual considered plan for rebuilding, not just selling people because “this team isn’t good enough.” Again, if the team goes into rebuild, best-case scenario or so is that they build a team with the 4th-best run differential in baseball. Oh wait…..
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
by hugo on Jul 17, 2009 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But now the Jays are underachieving
Players not hitting with RISP for a month and a half is not a good reason to tank the franchise for two and a half years.
They're not just hitting home runs. They're doing the little things, like hitting doubles.
by Torgen on Jul 17, 2009 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
exactly
the Jays had the 4th-best run differential in all of baseball last year and 3 weeks ago, had the 4th best run differential in all of baseball this year. I just don’t see it as a team that “can’t compete.” The funny thing is that if the team is torn down now, it’s a best-case scenario that maybe in 3 or 4 years it can be built up to be as good as it was last year. Just maybe
"Let us go forth awhile, and get better air in our lungs. Let us leave our closed rooms... The game of ball is glorious." - Walt Whitman
by hugo on Jul 17, 2009 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
okay but
from where things are right now, you need for 3 teams ahead of you to collapse. In regards to the future, all three teams ahead have better farm systems at this moment in time. And an honest assessment of the AL West and Central would be that the bad teams now all have very promising futures, making the dogfight in the AL that much tougher for an organization whose system isn’t exactly elite right now.
Guess I’m in the minority here, and maybe if my team were the Jays, I’d view this differently. I’ll say this, it’s unfortunate they are in the AL East because otherwise they would’ve competed for more playoff spots. I just see the organization as running in place at best, and if I was a Jays fan, I wouldn’t be satisfied with that.
by toonsterwu on Jul 17, 2009 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
They have a dozen games left against each of the teams in front of them
so they’ll have plenty of time to make up ground if they start playing like they can. Plus, they’re still tied in the 2010 standings, but if you break up the team all the good luck in the world won’t make that matter.
They're not just hitting home runs. They're doing the little things, like hitting doubles.
by Torgen on Jul 17, 2009 2:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
No way, the team must be kept almost intact for the rest of 2009, at least
I am obviously strongly against trading Aaron Hill. I haven’t given up on Rios by any means, we need to see his 2nd half of 2009. I am a fan of Vernon Wells, I have always been. I am just frustrated by the current numbers. Scott Rolen well I was delighted when he arrived so no I wouldn’t trade him unless Toronto gets a great offer. I will believe for the rest of July that Doc is going to stay until something opposite happens but frankly there’s no reason to let him go now. An offseason is a different environment but not now when this team can still play a significant role. Does the majority agree with me? I don’t consider this month as the appropriate moment to let him go compared to December.
by Marco1978 on Jul 17, 2009 12:04 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
if you want a good deal
… you trade when it is most favourable for the other party, not you. If the Jays make the decision to trade, than they should do it when the market is strong. The market is strong heading into the playoffs. The market is not strong in December.
The party that the Jays trade with, if the Jays choose to trade, is the customer. If you want your customer to pay, you cater to THEIR agenda, not what is convenient to you. It makes no sense to try to sell Christmas trees in July and no sense to try to sell star pitchers in December.
If the Jays are going to trade, than do it right and do it professionally – IMHO.
by aagoodfella on Jul 17, 2009 1:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Okay, switching gears for a moment
and honestly, not sure why I’m fixated on the Blue Jays today. Got a bit of spare time on my hands these days.
Looking over the rumor mill today, I wanted to throw out a hypothetical. No, I’m not one to think I can randomly predict a trade. Rather, I’m curious on how Jays fans would view things, to try and see where this line in the sand that I’m attempting to draw by placing a random scale on trade value is.
But in Verducci’s column on SI today, they said there’s no way the Dodgers deal Kershaw (understandable). That said, they said they’d contemplate something involving Josh Bell.
I’m curious, using the 4 man map that Ricciardi drew up, what Jays fans would think about something like
Los Angeles Dodgers get: Roy Halladay
Toronto Blue Jays get: James MacDonald, Josh Bell, Dee Gordon, and maybe, say, a Josh Lindblom.
It’s not the home run trade that Blue Jays fans would desire, but it’s a really good trade that carries some risk as Bell/Gordon are a bit away. Anyhow, just to be clear, this isn’t anything out in the rumor mill, just wanted to throw a hypo out to see how Jays fans would feel. That’s a solid 2/3 looking starter in MacDonald, another good arm in Lindblom, both guys just about ready. Bell is a power hitting third base prospect, and Gordon has arguably surpassed other guys to be the top SS prospect in the system.
by toonsterwu on Jul 17, 2009 2:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Bell's a bit of a stretch to be ML ready next year
considering he’s in AA.
They're not just hitting home runs. They're doing the little things, like hitting doubles.
by Torgen on Jul 17, 2009 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
i think you misread what I wrote
but it’s a really good trade that carries some risk as Bell/Gordon are a bit away.
That’s a solid 2/3 looking starter in MacDonald, another good arm in Lindblom, both guys just about ready.
by toonsterwu on Jul 17, 2009 2:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That trade is exactly of the type I wrote about...
1 hall of famer for 4 players that might play 5 years in the big leagues. No thanks. The Jays already have five or six 2/3 staters. Why get a couple more for the #1 guy?
One more thing. Most people on this site acknowledge that Toronto will not commit the money to players that Boston and NY do. Therefore, you have to compete with what you have. You could always feel you need to rebuild when you won’t sign a Sabathia or Teixeira in the off season.
by Chesapeake Ron on Jul 17, 2009 5:00 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Jays have lots of pitchers in the pipeline
personally, IF the Jays move Halladay for prospects numbering 5 or more, I would not want more than one to be a pitcher
Mills, Purcey, Ray, Romero, Richmond, Halladay, Castro, Marcum, Litsch, MacGowan etc … are all starters in the Jays org …. the org is overstocked
by aagoodfella on Jul 17, 2009 2:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
you can never have enough pitching
and the Blue Jays don’t really have a lot of elite young talent. A lot of mid-rotation types, very valuable if they develop (considering their cost in FA), but quality is still something I’m not sold on. I like Mills, McGowan. Marcum/Romero have the potential to be solid.
But pitching can always be dealt. If Halladay is dealt, I think you pursue pitching unless pursuing pitching becomes a hindrance to getting a truly great positional prospect.
by toonsterwu on Jul 17, 2009 2:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
What makes you think Lindblom or MacDonald will be
“elite” young talent?
"Look at me! I'm Tomokazu Ohka of the Montreal Expos!"
by jessef on Jul 17, 2009 3:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
where did i say that?
I don’t think Lindblom or MacDonald are “elite”. Never said it anywhere. I said I don’t think that the Blue Jays prospect lists, entering 2010, will have any pitcher that is considered elite. I do like MacDonald a lot, and I think his upside would only be 2nd to McGowan in terms of young SP potential in the Jays system.
by toonsterwu on Jul 17, 2009 3:14 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
aagoodfella said that the Jays organization has a lot of pitching depth
to which you responded by saying that none of those pitchers are elite. This would lead one to assume that you are saying that they could use Lindblom or McDonald because they are elite.
I agree with you that pitching can always be dealt, but half of the time when you deal pitching prospects you end up trading Gavin Floyd for Freddy Garcia.
"Look at me! I'm Tomokazu Ohka of the Montreal Expos!"
by jessef on Jul 17, 2009 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
um
I’m not sure which side is supposed to be the negative in that. Gavin Floyd just needed a good PC. I’ll admit, I had my doubts about him entering the year, but he’s become a solid starter.
by toonsterwu on Jul 18, 2009 2:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That was the point
You said that you can always deal pitching prospects, but half of the time all you can get for them is guys like Freddy Garcia
"Look at me! I'm Tomokazu Ohka of the Montreal Expos!"
by jessef on Jul 18, 2009 6:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
My $0.02 on the annoying Halladay debate
Isn’t this whole “Trading Doc” thing getting blown way out of proportion? I have heard 45,000 scenarios over the past couple days. JP and Paul Beeston have stated unequivocally that the deal would have to blow them away. The type of trade that the other GM would be regretting while the ink was still wet.
Truth betold, the Jays are a better team with him, whether that is challening for a championship this year, next year or 20-freaking-13. There is no reason to trade him. He seems happy to be in Toronto and wants to win there. Why not focus on making the team better around him, instead of trading him? Attendance is down which brings down revenue. What is going to happen to attendance if they trade the face of the franchise?
There. Thats the last time I speak of this until the unlikely scenario that he is dealt. I can’t wait for the game tonight, hope the game isn’t overshadowed by all this nonsence.
Happiness is a long walk with a putter in your hand.
by craig in calgary on Jul 17, 2009 3:12 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
the Jays are way better with Halladay than without
… but there are org development issues to be considered and Halladay’s desire to win a WS
so, trading Halladay could be something that benefits everyone … for the Jays a step back in 2009 to take a step forward in 2010 beyond
for the counterparty, Halladay may be the final puzzle piece to a WS
for Halladay it may be a chance to win a WS before the window closes
it might get done or it might not but it has the potential to greatly shift the fortunes of baseball for more than one team oand one of the league’s best players
by aagoodfella on Jul 17, 2009 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Some notes from Bastian. Fanshot up!
'But I don't want to go among mad people' Alice remarked.
'Oh, you can't help that' said the Cat 'we're all mad here'.
by JohnnyG on Jul 17, 2009 5:40 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

by 

















