How much to lock up Lawrie today?

[satyr9]

I'm not sure what's going on here, but someone saying they think any 22 year-old is going to be over .800 OPS isn't trolling. You're convinced he'll do much better that's no problem, but that's hardly some pessimistic John MacDonaldesque slash line.

How about this line: .319/.389 for a .314 wOBA and you know who that is? It's freaking uber prospect Jason Heyward in his second season. Freaking relax a bit, both of you.

[flatjacket1]

Nobody was implying that Lawrie should be given a 100mill contract after 150 AB's.

100 million x 15 years

Sorry, what? I can't hear you over this post of 100M/15 years...

[RalphWiggum]

Nobody is saying that he is going to be a sure fire stud, that maybe he isn't a flash in the pan and couldn't easily flame out. But you are saying that based on almost a third of season we have no reason to believe this guy has real potential to be a great player? If this were a 50-60 PA sample I can see your argument but he played in enough games to at least give the guy a benefit of the doubt that he can consistently be a good player. You are acting as if it is more like than not he will be a total bust which is a beyond bush league argument!

I think he will be a stud, the line I posted is good for around 2 WAR (That's counting on average defense and baserunning), which is a average starter. Not bad at all for a 22 year old, I think it's a reasonable goal. He has the potential to have 4 WAR seasons and will probably make some All-Star rosters. My slash line I predicted was a very good line for 3B entering his 2nd season as a 22 year old. I don't know where you got that I thought he was going to be a bust. When Fielder was 22 he posted -0.5 WAR.

Show me a decent sample (not just an example or two) of big leaguers who played at the level Brett did during their first call up and played some significant time (40 plus games) who turned out to be total bust which is what you said by saying "it'd be optimistic that he put up anything other than average to below average numbers"

Well if you look at Thames line after 43 games, he had somewhat similar statistics and he wasn't playing the any of those games against September call ups. You HAVE to take 43 games with a grain of salt.

Remember nobody has said book a place in Cooperstown we are just saying based on the dozens of other kids we've watched that have come up for 35-40 games that this guy looks like he has the chance to be a great big leaguer. You are saying it doesn't matter how good you look (even over a decent sample size) you are going to be crap and that's optimistic...great argument Einstein!

I am a proud owner of MiLB TV and I loosely follow AAA baseball and saw Lawrie there too. (watched a total of around 40 AAA games, most of them were Lawrie-less but I still saw more of Lawrie than most people on this board) and he's a sick player. That's why I projected him to have a successful 2 WAR season. I don't see a problem with a 22 year old posting .250/.330/.480 with 20 home runs in 450 PA. That's a damn good season.

I think our difference of opinion is more on what is a good stat line, not what Lawrie is. .300/.380/.550 over 150 games is like what, 6-7 WAR? That's an MVP like season at age 22. I doubt that's likely.

I'm not expecting him to have a full 2nd season that averages out to around the numbers he put up in 43 games (which would make him a top 3 MVP candidate easily) but you clearly made it sound like anything less than people predicting him falling totally off those numbers "is optimistic". Nobody here has ever predicted a 300 average, 400 plus OBP with 40 homers and 40 SB next year but you have implied that what is realistic is to think is he is going to become an average player and totally fall of the face of the earth. Isn't it more realistic to believe a young player will at least (give or take a few points in each category, improve or be close to those numbers) than totally fall apart from previous averageswhen we have a fair sample size? Like I said we are not basing this off of 15-20 games. 43 games while obviously not a huge sample is a pretty good one.

[torontoaces04]

I'm not sure what's going on here, but someone saying they think any 22 year-old is going to be over .800 OPS isn't trolling. You're convinced he'll do much better that's no problem, but that's hardly some pessimistic John MacDonaldesque slash line.

How about this line: .319/.389 for a .314 wOBA and you know who that is? It's freaking uber prospect Jason Heyward in his second season. Freaking relax a bit, both of you.

Did you not read up a few posts? This GEM of a post is what you missed from the Troll.

I'm willing to bet Lawrie's slash line next year is around .250/.330/.480 with 20 home runs in 450 PA. That's being optimistic in my mind, he could easily have a much worse season.

^^ That's the "highlight" of the post. Go to the top of the page if you wish to laugh a bit more.

[flatjacket1]

I'm not sure what's going on here, but someone saying they think any 22 year-old is going to be over .800 OPS isn't trolling. You're convinced he'll do much better that's no problem, but that's hardly some pessimistic John MacDonaldesque slash line.

How about this line: .319/.389 for a .314 wOBA and you know who that is? It's freaking uber prospect Jason Heyward in his second season. Freaking relax a bit, both of you.

Thank you, finally somebody who understands the numbers I put up weren't abysmal.



I'm not debating that Lawrie will fall of the face of the earth, but I think we will have a harder go this time around. I posted what would be considered a "successful" season for Lawrie. Just trying to lower the expectations of 90% of Jays fans.

[RalphWiggum]

Nobody was implying that Lawrie should be given a 100mill contract after 150 AB's.

100 million x 15 years

Sorry, what? I can't hear you over this post of 100M/15 years...

He wasn't the one who endorsed the idea of a 100 million over 15 years so maybe you shouldn't come at him with things he never said. It doesn't take long to back check who wrote what and not group everyone in the same basket.

I on the other hand am fair game because I said I would have no problems with 10years 80 million, that I would take that risk that in the long run could save the club a hundred million easy if Lawrie turns out to be the player I think he will. (which I can't dispute I may be totally wrong on, that's why they call it risk reward).

[flatjacket1]

...someone saying they think any 22 year-old is going to be over .800 OPS isn't trolling...

Did you not read up a few posts? This GEM of a post is what you missed from the Troll.

...Lawrie's slash line next year is around .250/.330/.480 with 20 home runs in 450 PA. That's being optimistic in my mind, he could easily have a much worse season.

^^ That's the "highlight" of the post. Go to the top of the page if you wish to laugh a bit more.

OBP + SLG% = OPS
.330 + .480 = .810

I said he would have a .810 OPS. Which part of that don't you understand?

[satyr9]

I'm willing to bet Lawrie's slash line next year is around .250/.330/.480 with 20 home runs in 450 PA. That's being optimistic in my mind, he could easily have a much worse season.

^^ That's the "highlight" of the post. Go to the top of the page if you wish to laugh a bit more.

That line makes him like the 6th or 7th best offensive 3B in baseball next year. .250BA, .330OBP, .480SLG is an .810OPS.

[flatjacket1]

Nobody was implying that Lawrie should be given a 100mill contract after 150 AB's.

100 million x 15 years

Sorry, what? I can't hear you over this post of 100M/15 years...

He wasn't the one who endorsed the idea of a 100 million over 15 years so maybe you shouldn't come at him with things he never said. It doesn't take long to back check who wrote what and not group everyone in the same basket.

I on the other hand am fair game because I said I would have no problems with 10years 80 million, that I would take that risk that in the long run could save the club a hundred million easy if Lawrie turns out to be the player I think he will. (which I can't dispute I may be totally wrong on, that's why they call it risk reward).

Okay. Well, clearly you missed some key words, refer to underlines.

He claimed that NOBODY was implying he deserved a 100M contract. Clearly, UN-Owen was. Trust me, I'm not grouping you all in the same basket.

Refer to my post earlier. We could renew his contract for around 414k, instead you want to pay him 8M. That's a huge surplus. Arbitration years nobody gets fair value, Joey Votto didn't even get 15M after becoming the NL MVP. He signed directly following the season for less. That was after he got renewed 2-3 times. The math of an 80M/8 year deal makes no sense.

[torontoaces04]

I'm not sure what's going on here, but someone saying they think any 22 year-old is going to be over .800 OPS isn't trolling. You're convinced he'll do much better that's no problem, but that's hardly some pessimistic John MacDonaldesque slash line.

How about this line: .319/.389 for a .314 wOBA and you know who that is? It's freaking uber prospect Jason Heyward in his second season. Freaking relax a bit, both of you.

Nice try bud, except flatjacket was talking about AVG/OBP/SLG.

You just listed OBP/SLG/OPS

Jason Heyward is far from an "uber prospect". Mike Trout, Stephen Strasburg, Bryce Harper...those are uber prospects.

[RalphWiggum]

I'm not sure what's going on here, but someone saying they think any 22 year-old is going to be over .800 OPS isn't trolling. You're convinced he'll do much better that's no problem, but that's hardly some pessimistic John MacDonaldesque slash line.

How about this line: .319/.389 for a .314 wOBA and you know who that is? It's freaking uber prospect Jason Heyward in his second season. Freaking relax a bit, both of you.

Thank you, finally somebody who understands the numbers I put up weren't abysmal.



I'm not debating that Lawrie will fall of the face of the earth, but I think we will have a harder go this time around. I posted what would be considered a "successful" season for Lawrie. Just trying to lower the expectations of 90% of Jays fans.

It's your wording my friend that has got you so much heat. That it is "optimistic" he is a 250 hitter with 20 dongs after batting close to 300 with 9 hr in 43 games. Go ahead and say he can't keep that pace (that's more than fair) but to say it is optimistic to expect numbers FAR less than he produced last year...I'm sorry just make you look foolish. He will probably have a slight drop off but even with a drop off the numbers you laid out (even if they turn out to be true) are just foolish to predict as more than likely. You do somewhat understand the fury right?

[Bautista19]

Looks like somebody has a short memory. Last time I checked, Jason Heyward was the consensus #1 prospect in baseball a couple years ago. Now he's not an uber prospect, but Lawrie is? Somebodies seeing the world through his blue tinted glasses.

[Avenger]

I'm not sure what's going on here, but someone saying they think any 22 year-old is going to be over .800 OPS isn't trolling. You're convinced he'll do much better that's no problem, but that's hardly some pessimistic John MacDonaldesque slash line.

How about this line: .319/.389 for a .314 wOBA and you know who that is? It's freaking uber prospect Jason Heyward in his second season. Freaking relax a bit, both of you.

Nice try bud, except flatjacket was talking about AVG/OBP/SLG.

You just listed OBP/SLG/OPS

Jason Heyward is far from an "uber prospect". Mike Trout, Stephen Strasburg, Bryce Harper...those are uber prospects.

lol Heyward is teh definition of an uber prospect, the hype he got when he debuted is much greater than Trout, with Strasburg but you're going into pitcher vs hitter. He was being compared to Hank Aaron and Aaron himself said that Heyward could fix what's ailing baseball.

[flatjacket1]

Nice try bud, except flatjacket was talking about AVG/OBP/SLG.

You just listed OBP/SLG/OPS

Jason Heyward is far from an "uber prospect". Mike Trout, Stephen Strasburg, Bryce Harper...those are uber prospects.

Okay, so clearly you have no idea what your talking about.

I posted .250/.330/.480. AVG/OBP/SLG%. Right?

Well, as you may know, OBP + SLG% = OPS. Now add .330 to .480. What do you get? Call me when you get .810.

Jason Heyward was rated #1 prospect by Baseball America in 2010.
http://www.baseballamerica.com/today/pr ... 69546.html

[Weems]

Now add .330 to .480. What do you get? Call me when you get .810.

What's your number, sweet cheeks?

[RalphWiggum]

No it doesn't make total sense and I simply proposed that idea because I believe he's the face and future of the team. That by showing him faith and paying him now when he has no clout that that could possibly be a huge windfall for the Jays down the road. That showing him the money when we had all the power to lowball him (and the right) that maybe when he could look back on what the Jays did for him he will not pull a Pujols (don't think he'll ever be that valuable but you get the idea I hope) because we rewarded him when we didn't have to. I very well could be naive in my stance but I think locking Lawrie up now long term is in the best interest of the Jays. Overpaying a little now could save the team a hundred million (maybe more) in the long run. The other side of the coin is we end up overpaying him 20-30 million if he only turns out to be 60-70% of the player we all hope he'll be. IMO that extra 20-30 million is well worth the reward but that's probably why I'm eight beers deep and typing on a computer and not running a major league team.

I truly believe in 4-5 years time Lawrie is going to be one of the best 4-5 players in baseball. I want to get in early the same as a professional gambler wants to get in early on a football team at 8-1 to win the Superbowl before their odds fall to 5-2.

You can't win big unless you risk big the majority of the time, to me he
is worth the risk.

[flatjacket1]

Now add .330 to .480. What do you get? Call me when you get .810.

What's your number, sweet cheeks?

905-law-rie1

[flatjacket1]

No it doesn't make total sense and I simply proposed that idea because I believe he's the face and future of the team. That by showing him faith and paying him now when he has no clout that that could possibly be a huge windfall for the Jays down the road. That showing him the money when we had all the power to lowball him (and the right) that maybe when he could look back on what the Jays did for him he will not pull a Pujols (don't think he'll ever be that valuable but you get the idea I hope) because we rewarded him when we didn't have to. I very well could be naive in my stance but I think locking Lawrie up now long term is in the best interest of the Jays. Overpaying a little now could save the team a hundred million (maybe more) in the long run. The other side of the coin is we end up overpaying him 20-30 million if he only turns out to be 60-70% of the player we all hope he'll be. IMO that extra 20-30 million is well worth the reward but that's probably why I'm eight beers deep and typing on a computer and not running a major league team.

Makes sense to a degree. I guess there's reasons we both aren't in management