Arms race still
by nwobigboy on Dec 24, 2011 11:08 AM EST
Email
PrintOffensively, I would still like to see Jose Bautista bat cleanup, with yuni, raz, and brett "the law" lawrie respectfully in front of him. Yunel Escobar hits that single to start, Colby Rasmus singles but the throw to 3rd gets him 2nd base, Brett Lawrie fights off those 1-2 fastballs to eventually earn a full count, stays off the strikeout breaking pitch in the dirt, and Bang. Joey Bats, no open bases, manager comes out to talk to his starter. Everyone in the stadium knows damage is about to happen. This entire scenario or any like it can't happen because there's always an open base currently with him in the 3 hole. We really don't need another bat and its easier to acquire one near deadline if your a buyer. Save the $ for pitching.
Bullpen wise, i remember early on in the season our stats looked great, but i can't even look at how we finished, we stunk it up. But this year we'll be better for at least from subtraction than the additions to date. Never liked Shawn Camp, Frank Francisco took all year to get to mid season form, we traded a bunch but we're all happy with that trade. Now we have a new closer in Sergio Santos, some new arms from the minors and a couple of quality #5 rotation guys joining them. Add in the innings we hope Casey Janssen can eat up, the only hole is a confident set-up. I'm open to giving it to Janssen or seeing if Joel Carreno can make strides, but i'd be happiest with Kerry Wood, he's reinvented himself in the bullpen and has the poise on the mound to pitch in our fellow AL east stadiums.
Finally starting pitching, as I said earlier, most teams have 4 pitchers that they are confident will at least be in the rotation to start. We have a bunch of #5s at best, and 2 or 3 young arms ready soon for major league action. Logjam! Jesse Litsch and Carlos Villanueva might find bullpen roles again but Dustin McGowan and Brett Cecil are unlikely to do so. Instead of another year of musical chairs, why not a veteran just to buy some time to figure out who Ferrell is comfortable moving forward with as our #4. Yeah i'd like Roy Oswalt, but even if Hiroki Kuroda can stay healthy for 10 starts, it might be enough time to see if Kyle Drabek is that guy. Im guessing if teams were calling for any of these guys, they would have been traded by now.
Our offence is fine, a year of Raz and Law will help too. One veteran arm for the bullpen and one for the rotation, gives us freedom to access our chips and still contend. If we can solidify our rotation four deep by trade deadline day, maybe we're buyers and go out and get a bat and another bullpen arm, that can help down the stretch. Maybe then with our foes getting older, our dynasty can begin. But for me the AL east will always be an arms race and that's where we must improve.
92 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Jose should be batting second if anything, not fourth
And I think Kerry Wood wants to finish with Chicago. Also, I don’t know where you got the idea that contenders need to have four solid starters. The Yankees didn’t have any “sure things” behind Sabathia this year, and they were certainly a contender.
fourth is fine
more opportunities to hit after the other top-2 OBA guys, and leads off second inning otherwise. I’d prefer 2nd too, but 2nd and 4th are where your best hitters go
I agree baby gurl.
Brett Anderson is the Truth. Brett Anderson is divine presence. Brett Anderson is eternal life. Brett Anderson is within you. Brett Anderson is here. Brett Anderson is Now.
by Frederick0220 on Dec 25, 2011 11:19 PM EST up reply actions
Making my point
Yankees weren’t high on quality after Sabathia, but they knew before spring training, who they were going with. “Solid” 4 is what we need by trade deadline day, “Starting” 4 is what we need before April. Instead of 5-6 pitchers fighting for 2 spots, i’d rather see 3 fighting for 1. Its the equivalent of starting a football season with a quarterback controversy, I believe we’d be better acquiring a SP or just naming who our #4 will be, instead of sorting in spring training.
But what possible advantage is there in knowing who your starting four will be before spring training. If anything, it’s a disadvantage, because if you give a guy a set role of the “number four starter” then it ties him to that role and it would be tougher to make changes. I would rather have a team with two sure things (Romero, Morrow) and be able to make changes in the bottom three. I just feel like assigned roles in the bottom of the rotation is an unnecessary commitment.
Boras client
Not interested at the type of contract he’ll end up getting, especially since we already have a closer.
by MjwW on Dec 26, 2011 3:54 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
BUT HES SHINY
I’m just saying it still would be a “Short term” contract (less than 5 years) and its not our money. Still gives us a chance to go bat shopping when Lawrie goes ape in his prime.
why are we waiting for Lawrie?
why don’t we go bat shopping when Bautista is going ape in his prime right now?
Because then we are stuck with 2 WAR Prince Fielder
When every other player on the team is going prime. Doing all those trades and signings to surround 1 man in his prime is foolish when we have 8 others who are in their prime in a few years.
If I was AA I’d trade Bautista for Upton and do a victory dance.
Uhh
While you’re doing the victory dance, the rest of the fanbase, myself included, will be extraordinarily upset about a terrible trade and tremendous loss of value
A even more tremendous loss in value
Is letting Bautista become a 2 win player by the end of his contract with no ring to show for it.
The way I look at it is:
10 years of Upton (entering prime)
5 years of Bautista (declining)
um...
where are you getting these ten cost-controlled years of Upton from? last I checked he never signed a 10 year contract
Will he leave a hitter friendly park even when we offer him monay
I don’t think so. We can retain players quite easily here. We have deep pockets.
why would he care about a hitter friendly park
when he knows we’re going to sign him for a total of 10 years
And more importantly
Beyond his controlled years, there’s no projected surplus value since you’re buying out free agent years. So you’re trading a ton of surplus value in Bautista for much less in Upton
That's totally the wrong way to look at it
I mean, sure I want to see a WS too. But in the meantime, he is making us a better team, which is important, if nothing else, for maintaining interest —> more fans and viewers —> more revenue. If you get rid of guys like Bautista, it just makes the gap from .500 to the postseason that much bigger
For the right package, sure. Any trade that makes you better can make sense. For Upton, not in a million years.
Seems a bit strong
there aren’t many 24 year old 6 WAR players in the league. not saying I want to get rid of Bautista but Upton is very valuable and his prime is more likely to coincide with our other players than Bautista. I could understand the trade.
by Matthew Mueller on Dec 26, 2011 9:59 PM EST up reply actions
I couldn't
since Bautista has such a ridiculous amount of surplus value. you can have Bautista – who, following standard aging, should still be a very solid player in a couple years – plus, say, $12M which can improve your team a lot in addition. Upton’s an excellent player, but there is a lot more to this trade than talent for talent
Don’t get me wrong, Justin Upton is a great player. But he’s under control for 4 years, just like Bautista. And we have an option after that on Bautista. Bautista is under contract for $57M guaranteed over 4 year…if he were a free agent he’d probably get upwards of 7 years, and $150M (using Werth as a starting point). So there’s probably 75-80M of surplus value there, considering most of the value in the free agent contract would come in the next 4 years.
Also, Upton’s not quite a true talent 6 WAR player – he was last year, but it was also his best year. I’d estimate him at 4.5-5 WAR. So if you figure 20 WAR over 4 years, less the $45M he’s owed, you get 55M of surplus – that’s a good $20M+ of surplus value lost in a straight up deal.
ie
you’re losing a top-10 hitting prospect in surplus value by trading Bats for Upton straight up. you’re throwing away Anthony Rendon
it feels like we've been rehashing the same idea over and over again for the past week
His 2011 wRC+ is 26
It's worse this year
Extra long offseason:
1) 2011 ended realtively early – Sept 28
2) 2012 starts relatively late – April 6 (ish – too lazy to check)
3) Leap year – extra day in Feb.
"Short term contract"
Means different things in different contexts. For a 27 year player in his prime, 5 years is short term. For a 30+ reliever, 3 years is long term
Check his periferals
They look good, and his numbers look pretty too. I think its a good low risk move with potentially decent rewards.
I know generally how good he's been
I mean, I have no idea what he wants, years or salary, because it’s of no relevance to Toronto.
He’s not signing for less than 3 years (he had 4 from the Phillies if I recall before it fell apart), and for a 30 reliever, unfortunately that is very big risk.
Yes
And right now its probably going towards making rich people richer and not Jays team better.
I understand that we need to spend smarter than the Yankees or Red Sox’s to compete with a significantly lower payroll than them, but at the same time a short term (4 year deal) to help the club win now with no downsides (if he falls off a cliff production wise he can just become a bench player/released) and its just money.
First – again – 4 years for an age 30+ reliever is not short term. It’s long term.
Second, he’s going to get 30M+, probably 35-45M. That’s not a triffling amount that you can just excuse as no downside if he falls off a cliff.
Signing Madson would be idiotic for this team, given where they are. It would be BJ Ryan redux (and no, I’m not saying he will become BJ Ryan. But it was a dumb thing to do when they gave it out)
Fine
We shouldn’t sign the best no compensation player left on the market, the team should try and get worse not better
And cue the straw man
Because, of course, the only alternatives are to sign an aging reliever and to “get worse”. Instead of you know, doing nothing, which is a perfectly viable option
You think adding Ryan Madson will make the club worse?
God bless ya I’m out of this thread.
Right
Not quite what I said, at all. You suggested that the choices were to get Madson, or to get worse. I disagreed that these were the only choices. Where you got that I think Madson would make the team worse, I have no clue. From a baseball perspective, he almost certainly would next year. From a value perspective, he isn’t likely to be good value (on average, veteran free agent pitchers are terrible value).
So to be clear, from a value perspective:
Do nothing > signing Madson > “get worse”, whatever you meant by that
I don't see us hitting a payroll limitation within the next 4 years (120M)
So money isn’t really an object here. Consider it the money saved from not waiting on Bautista.
Madson makes us at least a full win better, which people are willing to pay 200M for Prince (3 Wins)
by Mike Andrew on Dec 28, 2011 11:24 PM EST up reply actions
So money isn’t really an object here. Consider it the money saved from not waiting on Bautista.
Sorry, that’s a terribly incorrect way of examining the decision. Just because you save money in one way doesn’t mean you turn around and light it (or most of it) on fire.
So your still under the impression Madson makes us worse?
He had a better all time high in fWAR than Sergio Santos. Because lighting money on fire surely does and you equate that to the signing of Ryan Madson.
I would still give him 27M/3 years, which is what we would be resigning Santos for if he repeats his effectiveness. (Not for a while)
Its like what, 5M/WAR and hes 1.7 WAR? That gives him a value of close to 8M/season?
by Mike Andrew on Dec 29, 2011 11:56 AM EST up reply actions
That's a deliberately obtuse statement
I have already acknowledged that signing Madson would almost undoubtedly make the Jays better in 2011. That’s only half of the equation. It’s unsurprising that Madson would have a better single season fWAR, since Santos was been a pitcher for 3 years and only two MLB season, compared to 8 for Madson. Then you have to consider the contract value.
It’s great that you’d be willing to give him 3/$27M, but I doubt that’s where the market settles (my guess is he either gets more years, higher AAV, or takes a one year deal with high AAV and tried again next season). And I have no idea why you’re bringing Santos and his contract into this, what you guess he would get at some indeterminate point in the future having performed at an undetermined level of effectiveness is entirely irrelevant as he’s already under contract.
Honestly, I’d give him 10-11M on a one year deal, but not a multi-year deal. Even though you expect to lose money, you can possibly trade him at the deadline, or possibly get a pick or another one year deal next year. And he’s off the books at the end of the year if he blows out his arm. But it’s not going to happen.
And please read the following article about multiyear free agent reliever deals from Fangraphs (this one is good too.
Rivera looks pretty good, good thing the Yanks took a risk
But then again that was a bad extension as well?
Madson is much more established and would compare more to him than any of the other relievers there. Career FIP is 3.68 with his numbers IMPROVING with age (That’s right, he last 2 years puts him at under 3 FIP)
I would give him 10-11M/1 year too, I would rather that, but I’m more realistic. I would easily give Madson basically anything he wants over 3 years, just because of the state of the club. We won’t be hitting our payroll limitation within the next 3 years, and there is no compensation so money isn’t an object in this deal.
Mariano Rivera is the greatest reliever of all-time by a sizable margin
Ryan Madson is not the greatest reliever of all-time
Still was a risk when they signed him no?
Wasn’t Heyward supposed to be “the greatest prospect of all-time” or something before his abysmal sophomore season?
every contract is a risk
some work out, some don’t. and the Heyward thing has nothing to do with this
Of course
Naturally, you look at 12 pitchers signed to long-term deals, pick out the best contract that supports your claim, and go from there. Nevermind that 9 of the 12 combined to be basically replacement level. If you want to roll a dice where you win 1 time out of 12, come out even twice, and lose 9 times, good luck with that.
By the way, using Rivera to argue for free agent reliever contracts is like me arguing that because BJ Ryan was a massive failure, all free agent relievers will be bad contracts. Using individual cases does not prove a general. You either know that, and are being deliberately disingenuous, or you completely failed to get the point of the article I linked to, which is a completely different type of problem.
I would easily give Madson basically anything he wants over 3 years, just because of the state of the club.
This is just ridiculous. Because of the state of a club?…a club whose bullpen was pretty much average last year and has already been upgraded? Who really isn’t on the cusp of contention, where you’d like to have a rock solid bullpen? You build the starting pitching and line-up first, add (and overpay) the bullpen later.
which is a completely different type of problem.
You callin’ me stupid?
This bullpen was upgraded? We lost Francisco and Rauch as well as Dotel, Scrabble and gained who? Sergio Santos? Who posted a LOWER fWAR than the very guy your trying to argue against signing.
Still you have refused to see the fact that its NOT your money and we likely won’t outspend the cap set by rogers within the next 3 years.
I don’t see the problem to signing him 150M/3 years. We are still BELOW what Rogers set. If you were some chief owner dude from Rogers I’d understand your POV.
by Mike Andrew on Dec 29, 2011 10:24 PM EST up reply actions
Rauch was abysmal in 2011
Francisco was okay, but was injured and not as good as he was in Texas. Scrabble is good, Dotel was good vs. RHP and Santos is excellent.
you’re really being obtuse here. EVERYONE has admitted that yes, Ryan Madson would make the 2012 Blue Jays better. that doesn’t make it a good signing.
and if Alex Anthopoulos thought “hey, I have all this unused budget space and I probably won’t reach the budget” you honestly don’t think he’d sign free agents? you think he’d just be all like “yeah, we have some cap room that I’m freely able to use but whatever I don’t feel like it”?
But then you look up and its 2012 (Happy New Years soon!)
I truly believe that Rauch got unlucky and injured… or a mix of the two. Still a career 4 FIP pitcher after that abysmal 2011. Francisco has a lower career FIP than Ryan Madson.
I just don’t see the point in letting space sit there. Especially when we are 2 good pitchers away from a stacked bullpen. (8th inning guy + LOOGY)
by Mike Andrew on Dec 29, 2011 10:42 PM EST up reply actions
Especially when we are 2 good pitchers away from a stacked bullpen. (8th inning guy + LOOGY)
…of which Madson is neither. There’s no way he signs a deal to be a set-up man (SUM), since SUMs don;t get the kind of money/years he wants, and if he’s taking a 1 year deal, it’ll be as a primary closer.
We would move Santos into setup if we aquired Madson
by Mike Andrew on Dec 29, 2011 11:12 PM EST up reply actions
Fair enough
I’d counter by saying there’s no need to spend $9-10+M over 3-5 years to push Santos to the setup role. Which just rehashs everything else, so I think it’s best to just leave
I’m not calling you anything, and apologize if that’s the way you took it. I merely meant that if you’re trying to use an article as evidence of your point, when it is arguing the exact opposite, then it’s a problem because we’re clearly not going to see eye to eye.
I was using the end of the season as my reference point, as has been pointed out, we lost Rauch (who did nothing last year) and Francisco (half a good season, and added a stud in Santos. Granted, we’ve lost Rzep from opening day, and Dotel (who was signed around this time last year to a very modest deal, and I expect something like this again this year), but Litsch is looking like he’ll start in the pen, so that kinda offsets that.
plus
we probably have one of Cecil, McGowan and Drabek in the ’pen, and Villanueva is pretty likely to stay in the ’pen the whole year (though maybe no more likely than in 2011)
I think Drabek needs a full year of Vegas
to clear his head. And develop control.
by Mike Andrew on Dec 29, 2011 11:14 PM EST up reply actions
I would say he is probably just as likely this year as he was last year:
Starting pitching order going into 2011 (in my opinion):
Romero, Morrow, Cecil, Reyes, Drabek, Litsch, Villaneuva, Stewart, Alvarez
This year:
Romero, Morrow, Alvarez, Cecil, McGowan, Drabek, Villaneuva, Litsch, Hutchinson, McGuire
by Playoffs!!!!1 on Dec 29, 2011 11:14 PM EST up reply actions
I’d probably put Litsch ahead of Villanueva, if we needed a 5th starter (due to injuries or whatever)
by MjwW on Dec 29, 2011 11:19 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I think I'm inclined to agree
I just don’t think that is how the team views it (since they didn’t last year).
by Playoffs!!!!1 on Dec 29, 2011 11:20 PM EST up reply actions
Wasn’t Litsch injured when Villaneuva went into the rotation (and did a decent enough job that there was no sense switching them)? I could be mistaken.
Regardless, it doesn’t really matter, I’d be very surprised if either started many games, barring multiple catastrophic injuries.
I don't think it is a long shot that one of them is in the rotation
one injury and struggles by Drabek or Alvarez and one of Litsch or Villaneuva will need to start, if it happens in the first couple months anyways (I doubt the kids get called up before the all-star break). I would not be willing to bet against that happening.
by Playoffs!!!!1 on Dec 29, 2011 11:25 PM EST up reply actions
Drabek and Alvarez need to struggle badly (or two injuries)
for Litsch to move into the rotation.
our probable rotation:
1-Romero
2-Morrow
3-Alvarez
4-Cecil
5-McGowan
6-Drabek
so if Alvarez struggles, Drabek steps in. if both struggle, or we have two injuries in the rotation, Litsch or Villy might start (assuming it’s early enough in the year that none of the AA guys will get the call)
That’s assuming that no one is brought in, which is fine since we can’t forecast that with any accuracy. I imagine AA will bring in a couple of AAAA types to stash in Vegas (Mills-like quality) in case of injury, since I don’t think you want to mess with the pen by moving guys back and forth (less concerned with Villy, since he’s the long guy, but if you’re giving Litsch an important role as a 7th/8th inning guy, there’s a domino effect)
Fair enough on the name calling
I guess I’m just being overly sensitive.
I guess our bullpen is good, especially when you count in Benk’s addition of either Cecil or McGowan.
by Mike Andrew on Dec 29, 2011 11:13 PM EST up reply actions
I can see how you could have reasonably interpreted it that way, esp. in context of the conversation. I should have been more clear about what I meant
No I think its my bad
I just jumped on something I thought you meant.
by Mike Andrew on Dec 29, 2011 11:18 PM EST up reply actions
Salary doesn't matter until we make several signings
Only way to add salary now is through FA, so this next year is a wash (What’s the difference between a 60M and a 70M payroll? It gets us above the floor) and I doubt we add 50M worth of contracts over the next 3 years. We could sign 2 Fielders. It doesn’t handcuff us at all.
Its a short term help. I know the deal might not be short term for a reliever, but it terms of years, it gives us a nice boost for at least now and next year. Look at relievers aging curve, I doubt they dip off a lot at age 30. (I haven’t checked)
by Mike Andrew on Dec 28, 2011 11:42 PM EST up reply actions
doesn't even have to dip
he has never topped 1.7 fWAR in a season. I’m not paying $11M for a guy who at best brings net negative value
His 2011 wRC+ is 26
And if Madson would sign for one year, I'd be all for it
But he’s not, he’ll get 3 or 4 years (maybe three with a reasonably easy besting option). And you forget that in the next couple years there will be a lot of salary raises just from young players making more, even without free agents.
Sweet mother of God I hope not
And AA is FAR too smart to get caught in a Scott Boras “premier reliever” trap.
So many people obsessed with knocking the bullpen.
The Rays had a bullpen WAR of .7, the fourth worst in the Majors. The Cardinals: 1.2;
The Phillies: 1.7; the Rangers: 2.0; and the Jays? 2.7. Not that there isn’t room for improvement, but putting the blame on the bullpen is misguided and misleading. Clearly a great bullpen isn’t necessary for contention.
by Defense Counts! on Dec 26, 2011 7:02 PM EST reply actions
Correct
A great bullpen isn’t necessary for contention if you have starters that can reliably go 7+ innings. If you do, you really only need a couple of good arms. The rest of the bullpen would be largely irrelevant.
FWIW, since WAR is a counting stat, you’d actually expect a team with good starters to minimize the amount of WAR that relievers accumulate simply because the relievers get less opportunity to accumulate it.
Jays pen...
was 14th in the Majors and 5th in the AL with a SIERA of 3.57 last year.
I would also claim that many of the bullpen problems relate to Farrell's mismanagement.
The bullpen seemed okay when CV was the long reliever, but when he was put into the rotation, and no-one replaced him, the relief staff became overworked and fell apart. When CV went back into the bullpen, things improved.
by Defense Counts! on Dec 26, 2011 7:06 PM EST reply actions
I’d agree that things went downhill when CV went into the rotation – though I’m not sure if it’s just correlation or causation – it’s certainly pausible there was some causation. That said, I don;t think it’s fair to pin this on Farrell – the decision to move CV into the rotation would not hav been principlally his, if at all, and same with the decision of how to replace CV as the long man.
I definitely agree Farrell had some bumps at the beginning of the season, particularly with regard to L/R matchups and platoon usage. But I thought most of it was ironed out by mid-may or early-June, he seemed to settle in.
yeah
with regards to Farrell and bullpen matchups, it’s nice to see that he is/was willing to learn from mistakes. it wouldn’t be fair to expect him to be perfect (ie, optimize everything) right out of the gate, and if he doesn’t make the same mistake twice that’s all we can really ask for
I think things went downhill
because the rotation couldn’t consistently go 6 or 7 innings. The bullpen got overworked.
by Matthew Mueller on Dec 26, 2011 10:02 PM EST up reply actions
"We have a bunch of #5's at best"
Are you serious???
To win the AL East, we must have all-stars at every position.
It doens’t matter. Our performance is relative to our division.
by BrownMagician on Dec 28, 2011 5:31 PM EST up reply actions
first of all, it's impossible to have all-stars at every position
and in 2011 the yankees won the AL East without allstars at every position
His 2011 wRC+ is 26
That is a silly statement (it'll never happen)
And not even relative to what I was commenting (asking) about, unless your line, “our performance is relative to our division” is referring to our pitching. We have much better than a bunch of #5’s imo (that is either a moronic statement or indicates very little knowledge about the Jays).
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Bluebird Banter
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Baseball Nation Recent Stories
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Giancarlo Stanton busts Marlins Park scoreboard with tape-measure grand slam (VIDEO)
- Baltimore’s tradition of fans shouting ‘O!’ during national anthem sparks interleague feud
- Chris Perez follows rant against Cleveland fans with even better rant against Cleveland fans
- Pitcher Clayton Richard gets key pinch single in 13th after coming in 0 for 16
- Livan Hernandez welcomes ball boy to the bigs with shower of sunflower seeds (VIDEO)
