Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Strikeforce: Cormier vs. Barnett Fight Video Highlights

Questioning the 2012 Rotation

This season the Blue Jays have used 12 players in the starting rotation. There was the top prospects, the proven players, and the fill ins. There was disappointment in some and promise in others, but as a whole the Jays rotation is not yet championship or even playoff calibre at this point. With the loaded minor league system there is a lot of depth, but as we know not all top prospects become major leaguers. There is potential, but it can still be questioned as to whether or not it it will be reached. All of this and more goes with the uncertainty of the 2012 rotation.

The current Blue Jays rotation consists of Ricky Romero, Brandon Morrow, Brett Cecil, Henderson Alvarez, and Dustin McGowan. Romero is the guy who on the ballpark scoreboard looks like a true pitching "Ace" with a 2.92 ERA, 15-11 record, and 225 IP in 2011. But, if you look into the advanced stats it suggests he is more of a good number two with a 3.82 xFIP and 3.63 SIERA. He is still only 26 and has taken greats strides to improve every year since joining the Jays in 2007, but I'm not quite sure how he will get better without increasing his strikeout numbers. Then Brandon Morrow is kind of the opposite being the guy with electrifying stuff, but he just hasn't been able to execute. His 4.72 ERA would suggest just that, but again delving further into the stats Morrow has a 3.53 xFIP and a 3.16 SIERA which are "Ace" type numbers. The one thing you do have to remember though is that Morrow is only in his second year of being a full time starter in the majors and he has been building up his innings count and arm strength (146.1 IP in 2010, 179.1 IP in 2011) so there is still room for improvement, but the question is will it be reached.

Getting to more of the mid rotation Brett Cecil is a guy who is a serviceable back end starter but probably not one who should be a number three long term in the AL East.  With Henderson Alvarez you probably know the story, he was called up to the majors at only 21 this year and pitched to a 3.53 ERA and 3.38 xFIP in 63.2 major league innings. As well he produced at this level despite only really using two pitches as he is still trying to add a slider to his repertoire. He looks to have a pretty impressive future that could have him developing into an ace (if the slider works out), he has the stuff he just has to know how to use it. Finally with McGowan, he was essentially the feel good story of the year, he got in four starts he looked okay in the first start, pretty bad in the second start, stellar in his third start and back to pretty bad in his last start. He could be a rotation piece, but we won't be able to tell until spring training, when he has said that he will be 100%. 

Looking towards the future, this year we saw three minor leaguers who really established themselves as top end pitching prospects with Deck McGuire, Nestor Molina, and Drew Hutchinson. McGuire before the season was regarded as a top end prospect after ranking at 95 on Baseball America's Top 100 Prospects List, but this year he has put his stuff into numbers. McGuire had a 2.75 ERA, a  1.21 WHIP and a 2.68 K/BB in 104.2 IP at Dunedin and then put in a 4.35 ERA in three starts at New Hampshire. He was said to be a guy who would reach the majors quickly after the Blue Jays took him with their first round pick in 2010 and he is doing just that.

Before this season Molina was really what one could call a surprise prospect. He was a reliever in 2010 but has flourished since becoming a starter in 2011. He put up a 2.58 ERA and a 1.07 WHIP with a 8.21 K/BB in 108.1 IP at Dunedin. From there Molina went on to absolutely dominate in 5 starts at New Hampshire having pitched to a 0.41 ERA, a 0.67 WHIP and a 16.50 K/BB. Molina is not generally regarded to have amazing stuff but if he can put up those kind of numbers then he will push his way to the majors. Finally arguably the biggest jumper on the prospect charts in the Blue Jays organization is Drew Hutchinson. He's a guy who started his season with the Lugnuts, but had pitched so well that by the end he too was getting a feel for the Eastern League. In 134.1 IP between lo A and hi A Drew pitched to a 2.68 ERA, a 1.07 WHIP and a 4.54 K/BB. Like the other two Hutchinson also had a New Hampshire cameo where he performed to a 1.20 ERA, a 0.64 WHIP, and a 10.50 K/BB in 3 starts.

All three of these guys have put out amazing seasons, but Baseball Prospectus' Kevin Goldstein had this to say about the Fishercat Foursome.

Obviously Kevin Goldstein's opinion isn't the law, but he is a pretty respected member of the online prospect community and he is a guy who talks to a lot of scouts in the baseball industry. Thus meaning that none of these stellar seasons may transfer to top end major league success. That doesn't mean that any of these guys won't be able to be solid 2s or 3s (if any of them even make it to that), but it does lean towards the thought that these are probability players not ceiling guys. As well even if they won't be top starters in the AL East, having extra #2s isn't a bad thing and there is always the trade route, which with AA as our GM seems like a high possibility, especially with recent AA trades as well as recent trade speculation.

Along with these three big players are the likes of Kyle Drabek and Chad Jenkins (who is mentioned in the above tweet). Everyone knows the story on Kyle Drabek, he was #23 on Baseball America's Top 100 Prospects before this season. Drabek's first start was pretty impressive having gone 7.0 innings with 3 walks and 7 strikeouts, but since then well he was kind of awful in both the majors and minors. During his time with the Blue Jays he didn't know the meaning of the word command. He averaged 6.29 BB/9 and had a last in the league 0.93 K/BB. The Blue Jays waited it out but eventually they sent him down to AAA where he hasn't been much better. As for Jenkins he was the Blue Jays 1st round pick in 2009, which was the last draft of the Ricciardi era. He doesn't have as impressive stuff or numbers as the other 3 members of the Fishercat Foursome, but he could become a back end starter (at best) or long reliever for the Blue Jays or another team should the Jays decide to trade him. 

Finally there is the guys with big stuff in the lower minors such as Noah Syndergaard, Aaron Sanchez, Daniel Norris, and Justin Nicolino. All these guys have good stuff and have shown it off in the low minors. The question then becomes whether or not they can develop it at the higher levels of the farm system next year. They all have a chance to become great major leaguers and potential top of the line starters, but they are all still at least 2 years away and definitely no sure thing. 

What all this boils down to is that the Blue Jays need top of the line starters and with their current minor league system it looks like they will have to wait a bit longer in order to develop them. But then the question becomes can the Blue Jays afford to not compete while Jose Bautista is still in his prime years. The answer is no and the Jays will have a tough time competing without some top of the line arms. The only realistic route towards getting these arms would seem to be with Morrow capitalizing on his stuff, splurging money on the free agent market, trading the system for a top a the line starter, or the Jays could go after Japanese right hander Yu Darvish.

I will be going over the Trade Route and I have already gone over the Darvish route at my own blog @ House of the Bluebird.

 Any constructive criticism would be appreciated for this post as well as the Darvish and Trade posts.

Poll
What should the Blue Jays do to address the 2012 rotation?
Splurge on Free Agency
12 votes
Trade for a Starter
108 votes
Go after Darvish
164 votes

284 votes | Poll has closed

Comment 191 comments  |  2 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

having read the discussions, seems like there is not much out there for FA’s that are realistically in reach; Darvish has too many questions, and too many costs. A trade might seem like the best scenario… a fourth: promote fro within.

by Gerry71 on Oct 11, 2011 8:09 PM EDT reply actions  

I like the idea of the trade too

But at this time there really isnt any clear cut pitcher trade candidates. There was Anibal Sanchez and Ricky Nolasco, but now it seems like Jeff Loria is going to keep those guys and go all out for the first season of the miami marlins and then there was James Shields, but comments were made ridding those rumors saying that the Rays like their pitcing depth. Id like to go the trade route, but it just doesn’t seem like we can right now, which is y I favour the Darvish option.

fWAR Since Trade: Shaun Marcum: 2.7 Brett Lawrie: 2.8

Internet Points: 1501

by Bluebirdz on Oct 11, 2011 9:21 PM EDT up reply actions  

70M is too much for 1 man

If you ask me.

I’d rather give up prospects for proven talent.

by Mike Andrew on Oct 11, 2011 9:47 PM EDT up reply actions  

I agree

but what proven talent are you suggesting we go after?

from what I can see there really isn’t anybody prominent right now to realistically trade for

fWAR Since Trade: Shaun Marcum: 2.7 Brett Lawrie: 2.8

Internet Points: 1501

by Bluebirdz on Oct 11, 2011 9:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

I suggest we go after a younger stud and give up more rather than less.

If we packaged Lind, Thames, Molina, and Carlos Perez we could get Francisco Liriano?

I don’t know, but I think there are tons of promising young starters that we could get if we packaged together some players in a logjam.

by Mike Andrew on Oct 11, 2011 10:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

Liririano is an interesting name

Hadn’t heard that one but it should b a possibility with the twins kind of in last

fWAR Since Trade: Shaun Marcum: 2.7 Brett Lawrie: 2.8

Internet Points: 1501

by Bluebirdz on Oct 11, 2011 10:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

isn't Liriano bad now?

1WAR in 2011. He’s actually only had 2 good seasons (2010 = 6WAR, 2006=4WAR) and 3 bad ones (2007, 2008, 2009, 2011 each=1WAR).

by SuckaMD on Oct 12, 2011 7:10 PM EDT up reply actions  

True

But hes young enough and I consider him a quality player… He has shown flashes.

by Mike Andrew on Oct 12, 2011 7:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

he's also had crazy velocity peaks and valleys

his first two years he averaged 94.8 MPH (!) on his fastball, 91.5 the next two years, then back up to 93.7 and back down to 91.8 this year. he really scares me.

by benk on Oct 12, 2011 7:21 PM EDT up reply actions  

wouldn't be bad to pick him up if the twins were willing to let him go

If it costs a top prospect I’d be a bit more wary

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 7:32 PM EDT up reply actions  

I just really threw out a name

There are plenty of other options available.

by Mike Andrew on Oct 12, 2011 7:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

well, there are plenty of options

I’m not sure how available they are

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 7:34 PM EDT up reply actions  

He didn't actually cost us that much

but yeah I agree

fWAR Since Trade: Shaun Marcum: 2.7 Brett Lawrie: 2.8

Internet Points: 1501

by Bluebirdz on Oct 11, 2011 9:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

isn't his contract from 2012 ~ 2016 70 million?

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 11, 2011 9:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

No

Just checked
its 5 years 65 million and only until 2015

fWAR Since Trade: Shaun Marcum: 2.7 Brett Lawrie: 2.8

Internet Points: 1501

by Bluebirdz on Oct 11, 2011 10:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

no wait on second looking

we have a 14 million option for 2016 so all together it cud be over 70 million

fWAR Since Trade: Shaun Marcum: 2.7 Brett Lawrie: 2.8

Internet Points: 1501

by Bluebirdz on Oct 11, 2011 10:01 PM EDT up reply actions  

the 5/65 is from 2011 to 2015 excluding the 2016 option

I’m saying 70 million from 2012 to 2016 including the option

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 11, 2011 10:07 PM EDT up reply actions  

It was basically just a 4 year/$55M extension with an option for a 5th year since we were going to be paying him around $10M for 2011 anyway (via arbitration).

by JaysSaskatchewan on Oct 11, 2011 10:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

No, it's over 5

just like Darvish (well somewhere between 4 and 6)

There's only 1 N in Drew Hutchison

by Gerse on Oct 11, 2011 10:17 PM EDT up reply actions  

Comparing Bautistas contract to Darvish's posting fee?...

Darvish is making much more than that. He won’t sign for anything less than a Bautistia like contract, without the 70M posting fee included.

And for anybody who understands finance, 70M up front is more money than 70M out back. Its a huge investment for a guy who might not even pan out well.

by Mike Andrew on Oct 11, 2011 10:22 PM EDT up reply actions  

I have a simple question

how in the name of Superman do you know the following two things:

1. the exact range of values for which Yu Darvish and the Nippon Ham Fighters will discuss a Major League contract and posting, and

2. that the posting fee is a lump-sum payment?

by benk on Oct 11, 2011 10:23 PM EDT up reply actions  

besides that

I don’t think many people here would want to sign Darvish for a combined cost of 140M which you pulled out of thin air

by benk on Oct 11, 2011 10:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

Good call

I don’t know either for a fact but neither to you, so for the sake of discussion we have to use numbers which are in the ball park.

by Mike Andrew on Oct 11, 2011 10:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think he's going to come over

for a combined fee of around $70M about 50-50 split between contract and posting fee, and for probably 4 years

by benk on Oct 11, 2011 10:27 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'm betting on the latter of the two

But that’s just my gut.

No way he post for less than 51M though.

by Mike Andrew on Oct 11, 2011 10:28 PM EDT up reply actions  

why?

wasn’t Matsuzaka substantially more hyped than Darvish (remember the gyroball?) and he “only” got 50M?

by benk on Oct 11, 2011 10:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

If you ask me Darvish is more hyped

But again I guess this is more opinion oriented

by Mike Andrew on Oct 11, 2011 10:32 PM EDT up reply actions  

this is true

I looked up Matsuzaka’s NPB stats and they’re actually quite a bit worse than Darvish’s (and I think Darvish compiled his at a younger age) so you could have a point there

by benk on Oct 11, 2011 10:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yes

Dice-K stats were worse but he was a year younger

fWAR Since Trade: Shaun Marcum: 2.7 Brett Lawrie: 2.8

Internet Points: 1501

by Bluebirdz on Oct 11, 2011 11:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think teams are a bit more conservative with Japanese prospects right now. Before Nishioka was posted some people were suggesting the posting fee would be up to $20M and it ended up being only $5M.

Not the same calibre of player but I see the total (posting fee + contract) as less than $100M.

by JaysSaskatchewan on Oct 11, 2011 11:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

This.

after Daisuke and Irabu, etc. there’s definitely a lot more caution, but it only takes one team; and so it’s really hard to predict how it will shake out. I could see a posting of anywhere from $30 to $70m, with a $50m contract on top.

by gabrielsyme on Oct 12, 2011 6:06 AM EDT up reply actions  

Lets not forget Bautista had 54 homers under his belt

And finished 4th in the MVP voting.

What did Darvish do? Pitch well in another league against inferior competition?

by Mike Andrew on Oct 11, 2011 10:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

How do you mean?

A guy hits 54 homeruns and finishes 4th in the MVP voting = 12M
A guy who pitched well in another league = 82M (Approx)

by Mike Andrew on Oct 11, 2011 10:27 PM EDT up reply actions  

first off

the Jays accounting people will absolutely one thousand percent amortize the posting fee over the life of the contract (making him about 28M, which while enormous, is about a third of 82M). second, if you think Japan is like triple-and-a-half-A, he would probably be the best prospect in the world: 222K to 47BB, and he can pitch 200-230 innings in his first season

by benk on Oct 11, 2011 10:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

The dude has done everything

But you even mentioned how hyped Matsuzaka was… and he didn’t do that hot.

He seems great, you can’t bash his play at all. He couldn’t have done better. But that doesn’t always translate, and its a hugeee cost to check and see if he works.

by Mike Andrew on Oct 11, 2011 10:34 PM EDT up reply actions  

well yeah

but it’s potentially the biggest reward on the free market this year, especially given the Jays’ marginal costs. maybe Darvish will absolutely dominate like he did in Japan in which case he’s probably going to provide a ton of surplus value, but the bust potential is enormous (which isn’t so true with Fielder, though his marginal value is less as well)

by benk on Oct 11, 2011 10:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

I would rather sign him than Fielder or Pujols

Just because he looks like a filthy pitcher which is just what we need. But if I was Rogers I would never cough up that much money for 1 player.

I agree though, he either makes or breaks whichever organizations wins the silent auction :P

If I was Rogers I’d “lowball” him at 60M and see if it wins.

by Mike Andrew on Oct 11, 2011 10:39 PM EDT up reply actions  

No

I’m pointing out the silliness of your repeated claim that Darvish would somehow have to be worth 70+ million dollars in one year.
Thanks for the finance lesson though, I totally didn’t know the very thing that I’ve said to you multiple times over this discussion.

For the zillionth time, cash flow != accounting.
Also, you’ve simply picked 70m out of the air in that one FanPost – no proper source has ever said 70m.

There's only 1 N in Drew Hutchison

by Gerse on Oct 11, 2011 10:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

A bit outdated but

Certainly there are benefits for Nippon Ham. One American League executive guessed if Darvish posted after this season the fee to negotiate a deal would cost "around $75 million." Another suggested "it could be even higher." If the Red Sox paid $51 million for a 26-year-old Matsuzaka, a 22-year-old Darvish could command a 50 percent premium.

Read more: http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=jp-japandarvish032308

by Mike Andrew on Oct 11, 2011 10:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

Or teams could get cold feet, as you have, from the Dice-K issues

and not massively overpay.

The reality of this whole thing, which should render the whole discussion moot, is that without access to teams’ internal estimations of non-baseball revenues generated by signing him, we have no sense of how well they actually expect him to perform.

Anyway, the main point of the first response, which I’ve said, like, 500 times now, is that there’s no way they wouldn’t amortize the posting fee over the life of the contract. It’s not only economically advantageous, it’s also the correct method of accounting for it.

There's only 1 N in Drew Hutchison

by Gerse on Oct 11, 2011 10:42 PM EDT up reply actions  

Darvish is proven to be better

Has less mileage and has had his arm more protected than Dice. I doubt he gets anything below 60M for posting.

This is true.

I didn’t think this was possible.

by Mike Andrew on Oct 11, 2011 10:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

okay, scratch my previous points about Darvish being better

I was looking at Sox Minors stats, not NPB stats. so it’s possible Dice-K was better in Japan than Darvish

by benk on Oct 11, 2011 10:50 PM EDT up reply actions  

Matsuzaka's NPB stats are on FG if you want em

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 11, 2011 10:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

trust me

i went over it in my darvish post on my blog and darvish has a fip about 0.9 better his 10.5 k/9 this year is ridiculous and better than anything dice-k ever posted and he gives out a lot less walks

fWAR Since Trade: Shaun Marcum: 2.7 Brett Lawrie: 2.8

Internet Points: 1501

by Bluebirdz on Oct 11, 2011 11:03 PM EDT up reply actions  

The 10.5 K/9 is impressive

but DiceK also had a season of 9.97 K/9. Though his BB/9 wasn’t that great.

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 11, 2011 11:10 PM EDT up reply actions  

yup

and ur right on the walks
Yu Darvish 2010: 10.5 K/9 7.46 K/BB
Dice-K 2003: 9.97 K/9 3.41 K/BB

In comparison Darvish this year much better, also the highest K/BB that Dice-K ever threw to was only a 5.88 which is good, but he aint no Darvish

fWAR Since Trade: Shaun Marcum: 2.7 Brett Lawrie: 2.8

Internet Points: 1501

by Bluebirdz on Oct 11, 2011 11:14 PM EDT up reply actions  

wait, aren't thsoe Darvish stats from 2011?

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 11, 2011 11:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

yea srry 2011

fWAR Since Trade: Shaun Marcum: 2.7 Brett Lawrie: 2.8

Internet Points: 1501

by Bluebirdz on Oct 12, 2011 8:25 AM EDT up reply actions  

but darvish is better

fWAR Since Trade: Shaun Marcum: 2.7 Brett Lawrie: 2.8

Internet Points: 1501

by Bluebirdz on Oct 12, 2011 8:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

A player is, for all intents and purposes, a capital asset with a fixed life (ie the length of the contract). A one time payment to acquire a capital asset is precisely the kind of payment that gets amortized. The semi-weekly salary payments over the life of the contract are akin to the operating costs.

There's only 1 N in Drew Hutchison

by Gerse on Oct 11, 2011 10:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

I elect we go the trade route

We got some log jams at certain positions and we are really 1 good starter away from having a decent rotation. (Romero-Morrow-Alvarez-(Insert player here)-Cecil)

by Mike Andrew on Oct 11, 2011 8:12 PM EDT reply actions  

That insert-player-here could well be McGowan

He’s basically got Morrow’s velocity, but with better tertiary pitches (curve, change). He’s very uncertain, but in terms of potential, there isn’t anything better on the trade market.

by gabrielsyme on Oct 12, 2011 6:11 AM EDT up reply actions  

I agree.

Personally, I’d take McGowan over Cecil if he proves to be healthy.

by Alan F. on Oct 12, 2011 6:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think McGowan could be our #1 reliever/closer

His arm isn’t exactly rubber so we couldn’t use him every day as either, but he also could keep his career going a little longer with less wear and tear on his arm.

I’m personally not a fan of McGowan starting, but I agree that Cecil may not be a good enough player to stick in the rotation. I’m open to seeing how he does in spring training however.

On the topic of Closer I think we should consider bringing Franky back. He had a down year but still posted decent numbers (17 inning scoreless streak or w.e).

by Mike Andrew on Oct 12, 2011 7:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

not really true
his career going a little longer with less wear and tear on his arm.

Doctors aren’t really sure, they think the routine of being a starter is less stress

Total Internet Points: 999

by Bowling_Guy25 on Oct 12, 2011 7:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

When I say closing

I mean splitting the time with another closer.

Never pitching back to back, always with ample warmup time and few pitches (Under 30-40)

They could even give him 3 days rest in between relief appearances.

by Mike Andrew on Oct 12, 2011 7:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

what do you think about 2 pitchers sharing a start?

One goes 4~5, the other goes 4~5.

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 7:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

don't see why it wouldn't work, really

but I see 30 reasons why no one would actually try

by benk on Oct 12, 2011 7:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

I can see arguments against it

like roster space and stuff, but I think it’s an interesting idea

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 7:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

SuckaMD keeps trying to convince me

that it’s a good idea to have 9-12 good relievers and have them each pitch 2-3 innings every game, and I’m having a tough time showing why it’s a bad idea

by benk on Oct 12, 2011 7:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

You mean with 4 starters?

I’m not sure how that works with 5 starters

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 7:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

oh wait

you mean like with NO starters?

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 7:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

that's ridonkulous

so ridonkulous it just might work

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 7:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

as Cashman said in Too Much Moneyball

If this works, we’ll have changed the game.

by Woodman663 on Oct 14, 2011 8:10 AM EDT up reply actions  

what

no, like 12 pitchers and no starters. someone starts each game obviously, but there’s no “starter” that pitches way more innings than the other pitchers

by benk on Oct 12, 2011 7:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

It's unfortunate how no team will ever try that

like, ever

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 7:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think a problem

is that you basically have to use crappy pitchers fairly often. with the starter-reliever system, you can keep a garbage time guy like Rommie in the back of your pen for blowouts to eat innings, but with all-relievers you need at least decent pitchers in spots one through twelve (plus injury replacements!)

by benk on Oct 12, 2011 7:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

unpossible

but i would love it

Total Internet Points: 999

by Bowling_Guy25 on Oct 12, 2011 7:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think someone should try it, at least

Can’t hurt.

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 7:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

With our rotation

it might in some messed up way make sense to me.

by Mike Andrew on Oct 12, 2011 7:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

Morrow for 4, McGowan for 4.

Would be pretty much the equal of an ace in my opinion, though it could blow up in the Jays’ faces

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 7:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

...Morrow for 4?

what? why? after we spent 2 seasons stretching him out to 200 innings?

by benk on Oct 12, 2011 7:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

Just an idea

He could go 5~7 or whatever

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 7:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

I would think McGowan/Villanueva

or McGowan/Litsch. not quite a super-pitcher, but you get 6-8 quality innings still

by benk on Oct 12, 2011 8:01 PM EDT up reply actions  

Heck I'd try it.

Not sure if Ferral is up for messing with the baseball gods.

Its like a 6 man rotation that pitches in 5 days.

by Mike Andrew on Oct 12, 2011 7:55 PM EDT up reply actions  

i guess the problem is

what if a guy cruises through 4 innings, do you really pull him?
Does he get to split the next start with the other starter? push back those guys?

Total Internet Points: 999

by Bowling_Guy25 on Oct 12, 2011 7:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think yes

because he has to be fresh for his next appearance in 2-3 days

by benk on Oct 12, 2011 7:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

I guess you set pitch limits to around 70~80

and live by it.

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 7:58 PM EDT up reply actions  

even the longest games

only take 175 or so pitches per team

by benk on Oct 12, 2011 8:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

Well, that would be assuming the pair pitches every 3 days or so, right?

I was leaning towards the regular 4 days rest

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 8:01 PM EDT up reply actions  

that makes sense

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 8:02 PM EDT up reply actions  

though

your best pitchers with the strongest arms would be able to go 70-80 pitches. but at that point, they might as well be “starters” anyway. I think the starter-reliever model makes sense since it maximizes your best pitchers (starters) but it could be a very interesting idea to have 3-4 relievers “saved” (maybe they could pitch an inning on their throw day) if you only have 4 viable starters

by benk on Oct 12, 2011 8:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

that sould suck so bad

perfect game or no hitter going into the 7th, and you get pulled
would not make for a happy player lol

Total Internet Points: 999

by Bowling_Guy25 on Oct 12, 2011 8:01 PM EDT up reply actions  

that's why it's unrealistic

no managers would ever do that.

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 8:01 PM EDT up reply actions  

Darvish

I’d say go with Darvish. My rational behind it is that if we get him obviously we add a high upside arm into the rotation just entering his prime. If we miss out, we’re probably not competing next year anyways, so you can tests arms like Mcgowan, Drabek, Alverez, plus the prospects (Molina, Hutch, Mcguire, Jenkins).

Free agency next year is strong for pitching with Cain, Greinke, and Hammels. Which if they are made available would be a strong alternative to missing Darvish this year.

This would all set up for a run to be made in the 2013 season, with 2012 being a possibility albeit a slim one baring a few breakthroughs.

by FenixL on Oct 11, 2011 8:29 PM EDT reply actions  

Personally also

I dont see Cecil here as a fixture in the rotation, in my eyes he very well might be moved this offseason to adress other needs on the team. Him leaving lets the rotation be Romero-Morrow-Alvarez-McGowan-Drabek, and that allows for a lot of evaluations to take place, and you can see what you have in those respective players.

Also with regards to the prospects, they might not project as true “number ones” but very few prospects are given that label. Hutch can be a strong number 2, as can Mcguire, with Molina as a mid rotation starter, Jenkins probably wont stick or will end up as a backend innings eating. These aren’t nocks on these players not everyone can be a number one, but a rotation full of number 2s are better than a traditional rotation of a 1, 2, 3, 4, and a 5.

If it makes people feel better, if Alvarez can add a solid-plus 3rd offering he could develop into a “number 1” that broadcasters and fans salvate over.

by FenixL on Oct 11, 2011 8:37 PM EDT reply actions  

What is the fixation on the "ace" label?

Why does a team need to have 1 guy who is deemed to be a true “ace,” whatever that means? A 3.5 team ERA (or FIP or SIERA or whatever) is a 3.5 team ERA, whether you have 1 guy leading the way at 2.5 or just a collection of 5 clustered from 3.2-3.8. What’s wrong with collecting a rotation full of 5 or 6 “#2/#3’s,” (i.e. very good, but not quite elite guys) rather than having an “ace,” a “2,” a “3,” etc down the line?

by SuckaMD on Oct 11, 2011 9:48 PM EDT reply actions  

aka

I basically reiterated the second half of FenixL’s post.

So yeah, what he said

by SuckaMD on Oct 11, 2011 9:50 PM EDT up reply actions  

I guess kinda agree

and I hadn’t really thought of it that way with the whole true ace mentality burned into our minds by baseballs broadcasters, but either way we will have to acquire more pitching in order to compete unless we are willing to wait until bautistas prime years are gone. And realistically speaking we’d b lucky if one of hutchinson, mcguire, and molina became a number 2 starter.

fWAR Since Trade: Shaun Marcum: 2.7 Brett Lawrie: 2.8

Internet Points: 1501

by Bluebirdz on Oct 11, 2011 9:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

Because

In the playoffs, you really only need three good starters. If you made the playoffs using a rotation of 5 #3s, you are going to be at a disadvantage facing the #1 and #2 of the opposing players. The other team’s #4 and #5 won’t pitch so your advantage over them won’t come into play.

Depth helps you get to the playoffs, quality and luck helps you win in the playoffs.

by siggian on Oct 14, 2011 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

Let's make sure we make the playoffs before we worry about that

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 14, 2011 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions  

mostly luck, really

the Phillies had the most ridiculous rotation in recent history and couldn’t beat the Cardinals

by benk on Oct 14, 2011 3:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'm content too

in what we have now as we have a fairly young and improving rotation as well as players coming up, my only concern is while not doing anything now we are wasting away Bautista’s prime years, which kind of gives the “need” if you will for another rotation member. Though the trade deadline may represent more pitchers to be traded, it also pretty much wastes next season.

fWAR Since Trade: Shaun Marcum: 2.7 Brett Lawrie: 2.8

Internet Points: 1501

by Bluebirdz on Oct 11, 2011 11:17 PM EDT up reply actions  

Morrow should improve just by regression

and I don’t think Cecil is only a one-win player, but I think Romero is in for a serious regression and Alvarez – while I’m bullish on him – is very young and could easily have a rough year. I’m willing to say definitively that our rotation isn’t good enough to compete, as long as we do not improve our position players substantially (think KJ+Fielder or something)

by benk on Oct 12, 2011 1:00 AM EDT up reply actions  

rec'd

There’s so many pitchers that the Jays need to see if they can cut it: Molina, Hutchison. McGuire, McGowan, Cecil, Drabek…

by Woodman663 on Oct 12, 2011 6:12 AM EDT up reply actions  

Impending Logjam

They say you can never have too much pitching, and we could discover the truth of that statement this year, inasmuch as even after banishing Litsch, Villanueva and Carreno to the bullpen, we still have Romero, Morrow, McGowan, Cecil, Drabek and Alvarez as guys you’d like to start in the rotation, and Molina, Hutchison and McGuire as guys that you might want to bring up midseason.

There’s a lot of uncertainty there: McGowan’s health, Cecil’s velocity, Drabek’s control, Alvarez’s newness and small sample. If everything goes right, we have a very good rotation with Cecil traded or banished to the bullpen; if things go wrong, Villanueva or Litsch get starts at the back of the rotation – and they are respectable options – or we call up one of the prospects.

Ideally, I think a team wants 4 good starters and a project/prospect at the back end. Every so often when the project pans out, you trade one of your top 4 and move a new project/prospect into the rotation. Depending how you see our rotation, we will have 3 projects in the rotation, or no room for a single one.

by gabrielsyme on Oct 12, 2011 6:32 AM EDT reply actions  

Goldstein was just saying that Hutchinson doesn’t project as a #1. Hutchison, on the other hand…

by leaflover4ever on Oct 12, 2011 7:55 AM EDT reply actions  

Again with Grammar

fWAR Since Trade: Shaun Marcum: 2.7 Brett Lawrie: 2.8

Internet Points: 1501

by Bluebirdz on Oct 12, 2011 7:56 AM EDT up reply actions   1 recs

So what if he's not a #1?

Any team can use #2s and #3s (say 3.50-3.90 ERA) as 4th and 5th starters.

by Woodman663 on Oct 12, 2011 10:02 AM EDT up reply actions  

not many pitching prospects project as #1's

right now there’s moore. maybe teaheran but maybe not even him, and he’s probably the #2 pitching prospect in the game.

by Jono411 on Oct 12, 2011 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions  

probably not

my take on projecting pitchers as #1 is that there are a fair number with #1 potential (Syndergaard in our system, perhaps Sanchez as well – Taillon and others elsewhere) but they have too much uncertainty to project as #1 – everything has to go right for this type. Projected #1s have to have nothing significant remaining. Matt Moore and Strasburg strike me as true projected #1 starters.

by gabrielsyme on Oct 12, 2011 1:16 PM EDT up reply actions  

fair enough

but back to the whole “#1” thing – you only think there are 2 really projectable top-30 pitchers in the Majors right now? of course some guys are late bloomers and stuff, but still?

by benk on Oct 12, 2011 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions  

Now that I think about it

I’m not sure I agree with the way people describe “projected #1 starter”, but it does seem to be used that way. Besides, there probably aren’t 20 “true #1” starters, let alone 30.

by gabrielsyme on Oct 12, 2011 1:32 PM EDT up reply actions  

but isn't that ridiculous?

if every team by definition has a #1 starter, there should be 30 number one starters (given that some teams don’t have any top-30 pitchers but some teams have multiple)

by benk on Oct 12, 2011 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

It's not like every pitcher in the top 30 is of similar quality though

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to say there aren’t 30 ace-quality pitchers in the MLB

There's only 1 N in Drew Hutchison

by Gerse on Oct 12, 2011 3:09 PM EDT up reply actions  

well, this is scouting we're talking about
  1. doesn’t mean “top-30” even if we think it should.

by gabrielsyme on Oct 12, 2011 3:16 PM EDT up reply actions  

that's foolish

we can use it to mean whatever we want. a top-30 pitcher, to me, is a number one starter. maybe not an “ace” or “elite” or "superstar, but a number one starter.

by benk on Oct 12, 2011 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions  

fine, it's foolish

but I’m trying to explain what I think Goldstein et al. mean when they talk about projecting a #1 starter, not what they should mean.

Essentially, I think prospect watchers only project the David Prices, Kershaws, Verlanders of the world as #1s, because their stuff takes them almost all the way there. But most #1s (Halladay, Lee, C.J. Wilson, Carpenter) don’t have such overwhelming stuff- and it’s hard, if not impossible to project how guys will mix stuff effectively, locate exceedingly well, etcetera. So only one kind of #1 starter gets projected as such.

by gabrielsyme on Oct 12, 2011 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'm pretty sure it wasn't Goldstein who used the word "project"

someone on twitter asked him if Hutch “project” to #1, when they should’ve asked if Hutch has #1 “upside”. You’re right in that almost no pitchers project as #1s, but plenty of pitchers have #1 upside, and I don’t think Hutch is one of them.

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yea

Either way none of those guys really have #1 projection or upside unless one of them goes al Cliff Lee on everyone

fWAR Since Trade: Shaun Marcum: 2.7 Brett Lawrie: 2.8

Internet Points: 1501

by Bluebirdz on Oct 12, 2011 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

I love how like 7 guys project to be #1's in our organization alone

But in the end everybody knows darn well we will be lucky if 1 pans out as that caliber of pitcher?

Not just pitchers, but all prospects have these MLB projections and if every prospect followed these projections then the MLB would be full of .300 hitters with 30 HR power and pitchers with ERA’s under 3. The whole scouting thing is kind of ridiculous. Well the projections are anyways. Nobody can ever successfully call a bust.

Just my observation here :P

by Mike Andrew on Oct 12, 2011 7:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

"I love how like 7 guys project to be #1's in our organization alone"

what?

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 7:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

Daniel Norris

http://www.battersbox.ca/article.php?story=20110926134613190 (Daniel Norris)
Scouting reports uniformly stated that Norris has the true ceiling of a number one starter

As 1 example… 4 pitchers are above him on the prospect list and he is claimed to have the ceiling of a number 1 starter. So doesn’t that infer that all 5 of them are #1 caliber starters?

I’m just trying to point out how all scouts overrate players.

by Mike Andrew on Oct 12, 2011 7:40 PM EDT up reply actions  

There are ceilings

and there are floors. Norris has a high ceiling. He is also a HS draftee. They flame out a lot. I’d say none of McGuire, Hutchison, and Molina project or has the upside of a #1 pitcher.

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 7:45 PM EDT up reply actions  

crowdsourcing, especially amongst, homers, yes

prospects are routinely called future bench players or role players. lots of the guys who flame out at AA, though, aren’t really interesting enough for us to talk about

by benk on Oct 12, 2011 7:38 PM EDT up reply actions  

This is true

There is so many prospects but still a lot of them get the #1 label from PROFESSIONAL scouts (Some may be homers).

E.x If I 40 pitchers are told they have the ceiling for #1 starter, isn’t that physically impossible? and wrong?

Drabek was supposed to have #1 starter potential.

by Mike Andrew on Oct 12, 2011 7:42 PM EDT up reply actions  

Drabek had #1 starter potential

and then suddenly lost all ability to locate his pitches. He could still be a #1 with his good velocity and great movement, it’s just that the chances of him becoming one has dropped.

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 7:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

I saw him labelled as a good #2

don’t think I ever saw #1, but I’m sure someone somewhere called him that

by benk on Oct 12, 2011 7:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

I saw several reports of his ceiling as a #1

but yeah, I also saw several good #2 reports

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 7:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

I actually would say the exact opposite

I almost NEVER see the #1 starter label applied. I see plenty of #2 and #3 labels (and admittedly I’m nowhere near a prospect expert) but I’ve discussed many times on this site the silliness of the #1 label and how stingily it’s applied

by benk on Oct 12, 2011 7:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

I see a lot of #1 ceiling labels, almost never a #1 projection.

by gabrielsyme on Oct 12, 2011 9:34 PM EDT up reply actions  

Shellby Miller

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

Taijuan Walker

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

Gerrit Cole possibly

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

oh, "project" okay

not “upside”

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions  

Did Halladay every project as a #1? A lot of the #1’s are #2’s that overachieve.

by JaysSaskatchewan on Oct 12, 2011 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

At his best he was

Baseball America’s 11th prospect in 1999 and was the 5th pitcher

fWAR Since Trade: Shaun Marcum: 2.7 Brett Lawrie: 2.8

Internet Points: 1501

by Bluebirdz on Oct 12, 2011 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think he meant "upside", not "project"

Almost no prospect “project” as #1s. A lot of them have #1 “upside”

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions  

I was just pointing out a spelling error

by leaflover4ever on Oct 12, 2011 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions  

That's so you

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 4:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

not really "misinterpretted"

just went off an a tangent from her point

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 5:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

but semantics, really

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 5:01 PM EDT up reply actions  

Well Just cleared that up

I asked Goldstein and he responded none of them project or have #1 upside

fWAR Since Trade: Shaun Marcum: 2.7 Brett Lawrie: 2.8

Internet Points: 1501

by Bluebirdz on Oct 12, 2011 3:55 PM EDT reply actions  

good job

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 12, 2011 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

i feel accomplished *sarcasm

fWAR Since Trade: Shaun Marcum: 2.7 Brett Lawrie: 2.8

Internet Points: 1501

by Bluebirdz on Oct 12, 2011 8:27 PM EDT up reply actions  

Why not a "None of the above" choice,

or stay the course. You’ve listed 5 starters, plus Drabek (if he rebounds). Jenkins and McGwire close to major league ready possibly. If we do go any route, I think it will be via trade though.

by Alan F. on Oct 12, 2011 6:39 PM EDT reply actions  

A lot of people forget about Drabek

Hes just a kid and got plenty of room to grow. Not saying he will, but lets not cut off the life support yet.

by Mike Andrew on Oct 12, 2011 7:31 PM EDT up reply actions  

Red Sox and Yankees both need starting pitching...

..and when have they ever stopped spending money just because they got burned? Darvish shouldn’t even be an option in the poll.

by ABsteve on Oct 12, 2011 8:08 PM EDT reply actions  

who haven't the jays been front runners for?

 Everyone in the last 2 years according to the baseball media…meh. The evil empires have disgruntled fanbases..Darvish will end up in NY or Boston

by ABsteve on Oct 12, 2011 8:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

they haven't been frontrunners for pretty much everyone

they’ve been front runners for Adeiny Hechavarria, for one. this is a ridiculous conversation, you’re just saying that so on the off-chance he does end up in NYY or BOS you can say “I told you so”

by benk on Oct 12, 2011 9:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

they were also frontrunners for Aroldis Chapman

I think we were the 2nd team left, bid $26m and Cincinnati went $30

by gabrielsyme on Oct 12, 2011 9:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

I don't just mean international free agents

I’m talking trade rumours, being the mystery team in free agent negotiations, etc.. It’s been never ending for the last couple of years. if memory serves the Hech signing was the only one the prognosticaters saw coming. other than that i can’t think of a high profile move AA made that the media had been predicting. And seriously " the off chance" that he ends up in NY or Boston….come on, who’s being ridiculous?

by ABsteve on Oct 12, 2011 11:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

can you name some examples?

and yes, every single high-profile free agent in the past decade has landed in Boston or New York. that’s why the Yankees signed Cliff Lee last year, right?

by benk on Oct 12, 2011 11:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think your memory is a little selective

I can’t remember specifics, but I do rememberAnthopolous complained about all the rumour mongering in an interview a while ago, and if Cliff Lee could only talk to the team that placed the highest sealed bid…than I’m pretty confident that he would be a Yankee right now.

by ABsteve on Oct 12, 2011 11:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

that's not how free agency works

that’s how posting works. in free agency you can talk to whomever you want as many times as you want.

by benk on Oct 12, 2011 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

why am I arguing with you?

YOU brought up Cliff Lee not signing with the Yankees as a ray of hope for the Darvish situation, I was pointing out that they were entirely different circustances, which you then reiterated apparently..so I’m confused are free agents and postings interchangeable in this debate or not..yikes.

by ABsteve on Oct 13, 2011 9:51 AM EDT up reply actions  

Actually, not quite

Posting fee rules for NPB players is like human trafficking; teams are allowed to bid during 1 day. All bids are kept secret from ALL parties, until they announce the winner bidder, who then has the exclusive right to negotiate a contract with the player (posting fee goes to the NPB team). If the player and MLB team fail to come to terms, then the player CANNOT play in MLB that year and the bid is returned.

by Marcos Montenegro on Oct 13, 2011 12:51 PM EDT up reply actions  

that's correct

but they created this system to incentivize NPB teams to let their stars move to NA. Without a compensation system of some kind, NPB teams would just continue to hold onto their players until they had 9 years of service time (under their much stingier service time rules) and became international free agency.

This system isn’t worse than holding players to the single team that drafted them for up to 11 years (minor league + major league team control time). In that system, the team really has only 1 team to negotiate with, though the system has an arbitration system in years 9-11 to allow for some salary growth. In the NPB posting system, the player already has a contract with the NPB team and is given a chance to negotiate with 1 additional team (the winning MLB bidder). It’s not like he has to negotiate with the MLB team or not play (as drafted players must), it’s they can negotiate with the MLB team or continue to play under their previously negotiated NPB contract. It’s like the Jays allowing a player still under contract to them to negotiate with another club (e.g. the Yankees) who can potentially offer them more money in exchange for a cut of the new club’s money for their trouble.

I would venture to say that you do not advocate that every potential MLB player be a free agent at all times, as that would allow rich teams like the Yankees and Red Sox to hoard talent and actually win every year. The present system (or some close variant of it) is probably the best thing for the health of the sport of baseball, but it represents more of a restraint of trade than the posting system.

Not saying the posting system is the best system they could have come up with, but it does what it was designed to do (i.e. create a system where NPB has an incentive to allow good players to move to MLB).

by SuckaMD on Oct 13, 2011 5:49 PM EDT up reply actions  

Personally, I have finally come to terms with the Darvish question. I believe if the Jays go after him, it will be:

a) because Anthopoulos and the front office believe his arm can play in the AL East. We really don’t have any proper points of comparison with the Nippon League to do anything other than guess, and the Jays front office has been pretty consistent over the last decade in identifying quality pitching.

b) because Beeston has found a way to sell it to the Rogers board in such a way that the posting fee is somehow decoupled from the commitment to saleries, and won’t tie the GM’s hands or stop the yearly payroll from increasing.

So, if the Jays go for it, I support it. I think we’ve been looking at it in a more traditional sense, like all of Darvish would come out of the team’s total allocated resources, and based on everything AA has said, I can’t see him making that move under those conditions.

Personally, even if they get Darvish or not, I still think the Jays should make a run at James Shields. I think he’s undervalued in the league and while he wouldn’t be cheap, he’ll end up costing a lot less than equivalent talent and we already know he can stand up against the AL East. Obviously, if Tampa demands overvalue it’s not worth it, but I think there’s a deal there that will be market value at worst.

As for the rest of the rotation, I’m fine with Romero, Morrow and Alverez already penciled in for spring. I’m also reasonably sure that at least one (or a combination of) Litsch, McGowan, Drebak, and Cecil will provide at decent back end starter. Much like the last few years, it will likely be a young rotation with plenty of upside but a lot of questions regarding consistancy. I think getting one solid middle of the rotation starter like Shields helps stabilize it. I think getting Shields and then a possible ace like Darvish jumps us into one of the better rotations in baseball, with depth in the rotation that no one else in the AL East has.

by dexfarkin on Oct 13, 2011 10:45 PM EDT reply actions  

I think it's a good idea for the Jays to go after Darvish

as long as they set realistic limits for the posting fee. If posting goes over 40 million i’d get scared.

Also, Re: Shields. Shields isn’t undervalued anymore. He was undervalued last year after his terrible season, but he just finished his best season in his career. If anything, he’s probably overvalued at this point.

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 13, 2011 11:01 PM EDT up reply actions  

Shields

He doesn’t show up on anyone’s trade talks though. I mean, CJ Wilson has about a thousand words a day written about his trade value, but Shields never seems to show it. It might be media bias, but I still think he’s not considered highly, like this year was a fluke.

by dexfarkin on Oct 14, 2011 3:00 AM EDT up reply actions  

That because

CJ is a free agent this offseason, Shields isn’t.

Part of the issue with trying to trade for Shields is that the Rays seem to collect very well on their walk-year players, so it would really have to be a go-for-it-now move, ideally made in conjunction with some other big signings or trades.

There's something delightful about Joe Buck saying "Coke deals with Hamilton"

by Gerse on Oct 14, 2011 3:24 AM EDT up reply actions  

I disagree. Just because the Rays have a tendancy to make people overpay doesn’t mean that is the defacto standard. I think the Rays are in a position that they need to make value on Shields or his arbitiration turns into a nightmare for their stingy front office.

I think, at worst, Shields can be had for market value, and considering the Jays rotation I think that’s worth paying.

by dexfarkin on Oct 14, 2011 3:44 AM EDT up reply actions  

Shields actually isn’t arb eligible — his contract has 3 team options for ‘12 ’13 and ’14 (click here and ctrl+f his name) at 7m, 9m, and 12m respectively, so the Rays really do have all the leverage here (not to mention that the team options inflate his trade value). Add to this the fact that the Rays shed 30m in payroll from ’10 to ’11, and I think they’d be more than willing to sit on Shields for a little while if they don’t get a deal that knocks their socks off (especially since the buyout this year is 2m, so there’s only a 5m difference between paying him and not).
Certainly it’s possible – if not likely – that his trade value will never be higher than it is right now, so they may look to cash in, but that I would think that that has a stronger positive effect on his value than it does a negative effect on Tampa’s leverage.

There's something delightful about Joe Buck saying "Coke deals with Hamilton"

by Gerse on Oct 14, 2011 4:45 AM EDT up reply actions  

…cash in, but [no “that”] I would think that that has…

/5am

There's something delightful about Joe Buck saying "Coke deals with Hamilton"

by Gerse on Oct 14, 2011 4:49 AM EDT up reply actions  

I completely missed the team options… You’re right, that will likely drive up the price.

by dexfarkin on Oct 14, 2011 11:34 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions  

King Felix

Would be a good target for AA. Seattle’s nowhere near ready to contend and by the time they are, Felix will be on the downside of his career. Seatlle might be willing to take a package like Thames, D’Arnaud, and Nicolino to help in their rebuild. D’Arnaud is the real prize but sometimes you have to give up quality to get quality. Thames is young and at least has some pedigree in the majors so they can have some immediate return. Nicolino (or some other pitcher of about that level) is the longer term project.

by siggian on Oct 14, 2011 3:42 PM EDT reply actions  

If Hernandez is available

teams would be falling all over themselves offering their top prospects. I don’t think Thames d’Arnaud and Nicolino does it. More like d’Arnaud, Marisnick, and another good prospect

Sad, Drunk, And Poorly

My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we'll change the world. - JL

@medical_sword's #1 fan.

by Pikachu on Oct 14, 2011 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

Maybe

But at least it would get the conversation going. If what you propose is what it would take, I’d do it. The Jays are beginning to have the problem of too many good prospects and not enough places to play them (which is an excellent problem to have) and it might be time to use a few of them in this way.

by siggian on Oct 14, 2011 4:00 PM EDT up reply actions  

felix probably has about $30 million of surplus value. maybe he could bring back $50 million of future value in a trade. i’m going to guess they’d want one pitcher to stick in the rotation right now along with near major league ready hitting.

from the jays perspective, that’s something like d’arnaud, marisnick/gose and alvarez/cecil.

i don’t think i’d do that, given that we’d have to pay him $18 million per year. i’d rather just sign CJ Wilson and keep the prospects.

by Jono411 on Oct 15, 2011 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions  

Cecil

I think I’d like to have him in the pen. I’m not sure he’s good enough to be in the rotation, and I think we need another lefty in the pen. (though I suppose there probably is some value in having at least one lefty in the rotation as well)

I’d even prefer Litsch in the rotation.

by REMO on Oct 15, 2011 9:08 AM EDT reply actions  

depends on velocity

If Cecil regains his velocity to the mark it has been, I think he gets more Ks, and becomes a good, but not great starter. If not, the bullpen or a trade calls. Even last year, he was above replacement level; not good enough if the Jays want to compete, but I think there are a number of teams where he starts.

by gabrielsyme on Oct 15, 2011 3:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think he still deserves a starting spot

Not many players shut out a playoff team then move to the pen within 10 months. He has the capacity to be great, he just falls through more often than not.

I think he needs another full inconsistent year or for us to be legitimately contending for us to have a reason to send him to the pen. Right now hes just finding his way. 25 years old, promising signs and we are already jumping off the bandwagon. 2 strikeouts per walk, 1.3 WHIP, 4.7 ERA aren’t terrible for a down season.

I say he stays. Just my opinion, feel free to disagree.

by Mike Andrew on Oct 15, 2011 4:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

yea i agree

other than the phillies and braves, are there any teams that have 5 starters better than cecil?

by Jono411 on Oct 15, 2011 5:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about our heroic azure-tinged corvidae, the Toronto Blue Jays.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Hal2_small
Quantifying the Effect of Team Defense on Over/Underperforming the Team's FIP
Small
Brett Lawrie's historic defensive prowess

Recent FanPosts

Small
Blue Jays Player Stats Multiplied by 4
Small
Petition to change Suckage Award Titles
Jaysfanimage_small
The Lansing 4: What to do when they outpitch expectations?
Misc_003_small
Jays' All-Star Alliterative Name Team
Kingkelly_small
Stats tools?
Small
Jays Future Closer?
N41306733_31278203_7401_steve_golfin_small
my MLB power ranking, May Edition
Jaysfanimage_small
Blue Jays Farm Report - Apr 29-May 5

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Yahoo_full_count

Managers

Bluejayperched_small hugo

Rincewind-1_small Tom Dakers

Assistant Manager

Smith_up_small JohnnyG

Authors

Hiro_small jessef

Profile_small masterkembo

Profiel_small Woodman663

Minorleaguer_small Minor Leaguer

Tony_fernandez_small TonyFernandezSavedMyLife

Moderators

J_bau_small jays182

Aejfuulciaar18g_small Bowling_Guy25