Bee Gees vs Atlatls (Aug 9-12)

[youreachiteach]

Come on, Sensi.

I will say if they compete for a championship next season, you are correct. But I'd say that's pretty unlikely given the make-up of the team right now, no?

As far as whether "anyone could have known..."yes, they could have. Vegas went on buzz like everyone esle--but there were major problems here. Some of the pundits on MLB.com thought so (not many, but then, the buzz was the buzz--which had to do with the Marlins selling their talent off more than the Jays being elite).

Happ and Romero were not looked upon as major pieces to the puzzle--they were our 5th and 6th starters. Losing them shouldn't have been a death knell to the season. Romero was so far down the chart he didn't even make the opening day roster.

Reyes is a guy who has continued to get hurt in some way throughout his career due to the way he plays (balls to the wall and slight stature). Morrow is a guy who has continued to struggle with injury and has very few full seasons to his credit. You simply cannot be "OMFG I am so suprised" to see them get hurt. There are analysts at MLB at the time who dissented this way, and thought that injuries might play a role based on how old the Jays were as a team.

It's pathetic that people are parsing their words saying "well at least Reyes didn't get hurt on turf, they were wrong, durr...". Their point was that he is made of glass and playing on turf wasn't going to help. It sounded like sour grapes at the time--but it was a fair point in retrospect.

Dickey you've mentioned already. This really was the worst move, because I'd still make the Marlins trade anyway, the guys we gave up were marginal upside talents outside of Nicolino (and even he is a guy who looks like a number 3 at best). Trading Escobar wasn't such a hot move either.

The only guy who you could say was far worse than was expected was Johnson--but he had injury flags too. He was a young horse who was going to be too expensive based on his injury history for the Marlins. I mean, if you are rebuilding, why trade a young stud pitcher unless you feel he couldn't eventually measure up? I don't think it was just the contract, in itself (as cheap as the Marlins are).

I do agree that I liked seeing him go for it--and it's about time. How many years have we asked for this ? That is what all the fans responded to, not necessarily the actual results. This is why the people are still attending the games..they appreciate the gesture and want to respond in kind to the effort. It's also why no one wants to criticize--but there are faults here to discuss beyond roster management and you know it.

But again, as I and others have said before, getting Darvish and Fielder was a far better option (whether Rogers let him do it or not--although all AA would say is that Darvish was too big a financial risk and Fielder too fat to hit a baseball, apparently). So I don;t think he pushed too hard on either, despite several pundits pushing him in this direction) His moves after that were a day late and a dollar short.

In any case, there are gaping holes here where AA miscalculated on the depth he had. He incorretly judged JPA and Izturis, and now has to go bargain hunting for replacements. Getting Melky was a nice try, but was a poor gamble that AA seems to be satisfied being locked in with for next year based on his comments. There is plently to criticize here.

[Santoki]

Vegas knew what it was doing giving the Jays 8-1 odds to win. That was easy money for them.

[Randle McMurphy]

Of course it means something. He's the GM, we're fans. We can agree with his moves until the cows come home, but if they don't get the results, he's open to criticism. Even from the fans who had agreed with him.

We pay to see them and he's being paid to have them win. Our money gives us the right to go back and judge the **** out of him.

That being said, I don't begrudge him for the moves he made. He went all-in and it blew up in his face. In the end, his move failed. But at least he went for it, I was tired of only half trying.

Yes, it means those fans are complaining in hindsight about the very same decisions that they backed a few months back. It's one thing to have been like Schad and point out the potential failings of the deals when they happened, but to fully support such moves and then later rake the guy over the coals for making them because they didn't work out to your liking? It's a bit pathetic. I have no reason to take such people seriously.

AA took his shot and it didn't work out this year. It may never for him with this group. But at least he had the guts to take one, though.

[s e n s i]

schad, think i said as much when the deals first went down, that AA's job was on the line and rightfully so if his string of ballsy all-in moves didn't pan out. it was clear at the time that we'd pretty much be **** sideways post-2014 if that was the case. if we find ourselves in the same spot next year then it's open season on AA, i would encourage everyone to chastise him until dismissal is imminent. but as of now i refuse to blame him for taking a shot and i still believe the elite positional talent is in place for success. how he'll correct the rotation is anyone's guess, though i find it difficult to see it being any worse than it is now, so i'm not nearly as pessimistic as you or some others might be for what's to come next season.

if you asked me last season, i would have rather had a core of bautista, encarnacion, reyes, lawrie, johnson, dickey, reyes, morrow, rasmus from 2013-2015, than a core of unproven current prospects (very good ones mind you; d'arnaud, syndergaard, nicolino, marisnick, hech, alvarez) plus a free-agent signing or two, from 2015 onwards. just like the underperformance of many players on this year's roster was a possibility, it was never and still isn't a guarantee the prospects dealt away would have reached their ceilings simultaneously and be good enough for contention. what if they all end up panning out as solid 2-3 WAR players but nothing more? it was blow it up or build around the power duo of bautista and encarnacion. AA chose the latter, the window hasn't closed yet, i liked it then and still like it now despite where we're at.

also it's fair for someone who didn't like the moves to begin with to criticize anthopoulos. but i don't think it's fair to jockey between liking the moves and then not liking the moves in hindsight, pretty much what's triggered this debate to begin with.

[s e n s i]

Happ and Romero were not looked upon as major pieces to the puzzle--they were our 5th and 6th starters. Losing them shouldn't have been a death knell to the season. Romero was so far down the chart he didn't even make the opening day roster.

ja happ is surely better than whatever combination of flaccid arms we were deploying (laffey, wang, ortiz, jenkins). i mentioned romero because the hope was that his elbow injury which required surgery was the reason for his **** last season, and that he'd be back to being serviceable again. clearly he just sucks.

Reyes is a guy who has continued to get hurt in some way throughout his career due to the way he plays (balls to the wall and slight stature). Morrow is a guy who has continued to struggle with injury and has very few full seasons to his credit. You simply cannot be "OMFG I am so suprised" to see them get hurt.

who said that? i wasn't surprised to see either of them hurt. reyes injury was a freak accident that could've happened to any player though. travis d'arnaud suffered a freak injury as well but it wouldn't be fair to chalk that up to being injury prone would it?

It's pathetic that people are parsing their words saying "well at least Reyes didn't get hurt on turf, they were wrong, durr...". Their point was that he is made of glass and playing on turf wasn't going to help. It sounded like sour grapes at the time--but it was a fair point in retrospect.

how is it a fair point? reyes didn't get injured at the dome and has played his entire career standing on a harder surface (dirt). the "turf" factor should be reserved strictly for injury-prone outfielders who have previously played their entire careers on grass and are transitioning to a harder surface in turf.

[Duffman100]

Of course it means something. He's the GM, we're fans. We can agree with his moves until the cows come home, but if they don't get the results, he's open to criticism. Even from the fans who had agreed with him.

We pay to see them and he's being paid to have them win. Our money gives us the right to go back and judge the **** out of him.

That being said, I don't begrudge him for the moves he made. He went all-in and it blew up in his face. In the end, his move failed. But at least he went for it, I was tired of only half trying.

Yes, it means those fans are complaining in hindsight about the very same decisions that they backed a few months back. It's one thing to have been like Schad and point out the potential failings of the deals when they happened, but to fully support such moves and then later rake the guy over the coals for making them because they didn't work out to your liking? It's a bit pathetic. I have no reason to take such people seriously.

AA took his shot and it didn't work out this year. It may never for him with this group. But at least he had the guts to take one, though.

Yeah, fair. Picking on individual moves might be a little douchy, but criticizing the entire product is totally legit.

[Michael Bradley]

The issue with this past off-season was that AA essentially had to pick a direction. It had to be one or the other. If he did status quo, the result would have resembled this season minus the huge attendance boost. If he traded guys off, then he would have selling low on his main asset (Bautista coming off wrist surgery), and still would not have had MLB ready prospects coming up the system save for TDA (and I guess Hechavarria) and whatever he got back for his veterans. It would have been a long, slow, agonizing rebuild and while something like that could pay off handsomely in the future, it had just as much (if not more) bust potential. He built a team that, on paper, was good enough to make the playoffs. It went about as wrong as a season could possibly go, and he is ultimately the guy who takes the blame for that, but that doesn't mean the plan itself did not make sense at the time. It could still pay off next season with some tinkering.

Honestly, a tear it down rebuild is probably more beneficial now, since Edwin has shown he is for real, Bautista is still a star coming off injury, Reyes has been great, and Dickey is probably still tradeable. The Jays could probably get Profar and other elite prospects in return for these guys now while they are still elite and have many years left on their contracts. But then that pretty much eliminates any good will the team built up this winter, and AA is not going to destroy the core he assembled.

AA pretty much has to try to win in 2014 and 2015 (at least). Once Bautista, Edwin, and Reyes stop being elite, then a rebuild will not only be an option, it will also be the logical step to take.

[Santoki]

The issue with this past off-season was that AA essentially had to pick a direction. It had to be one or the other. If he did status quo, the result would have resembled this season minus the huge attendance boost. If he traded guys off, then he would have selling low on his main asset (Bautista coming off wrist surgery), and still would not have had MLB ready prospects coming up the system save for TDA (and I guess Hechavarria) and whatever he got back for his veterans. It would have been a long, slow, agonizing rebuild and while something like that could pay off handsomely in the future, it had just as much (if not more) bust potential. He built a team that, on paper, was good enough to make the playoffs. It went about as wrong as a season could possibly go, and he is ultimately the guy who takes the blame for that, but that doesn't mean the plan itself did not make sense at the time. It could still pay off next season with some tinkering.

Honestly, a tear it down rebuild is probably more beneficial now, since Edwin has shown he is for real, Bautista is still a star coming off injury, Reyes has been great, and Dickey is probably still tradeable. The Jays could probably get Profar and other elite prospects in return for these guys now while they are still elite and have many years left on their contracts. But then that pretty much eliminates any good will the team built up this winter, and AA is not going to destroy the core he assembled.

AA pretty much has to try to win in 2014 and 2015 (at least). Once Bautista, Edwin, and Reyes stop being elite, then a rebuild will not only be an option, it will also be the logical step to take.

I just wish this organization could eventually get to a point where it doesn't have to be one or the other. Lots of teams sustain success over many years while losing/trading their core players for MLB-ready prospects or by replacing them with farm help. The Cardinals and Rays are really the epitome of that right now.