2017 Budget = $165M

[Skin Blues]

Crazy thought: we trade Devon Travis for a position of need of similar value, sign Edwin, and slide Pearce to 2B. Even with being injured so much, Travis has been performing well and is getting a lot of fortunate outcomes on balls in play despite not much power and plate discipline that is scarily similar to Kevin Pillar's. I'm getting a Lawrie vibe with him in terms of the talent, injury proneness, and the feeling of projecting his success in partial season(s) to a potential full season, despite being yet to actually happen. What could we get from the Dodgers for him? Wouldn't be surprised to see something happen, there, but it'd probably have to be for similarly cost-controlled talent for the Jays to consider it.

I have no problem trading Travis myself. His injury problems concern me.

The question is, what team is going to trade us a cost controlled corner OF?

I don't know... didn't think it that far through. The Dodgers have a lot of pitching they could part with and have been tied to Dozier, and we could always fill the OF from free agency. Moss would be my preference, there, and at this point we might be able to get him for something like 2/$18M. Or flip whatever pitcher we get for an OF from another team. Pitching prospects are as good as cash, everybody can always use them.

[Rapsfan151]

lol i hate when fans threaten not to show up to games because of the payroll. You know damn well they could have a 200M payroll and casuals would stop showing up by july if they're losing anyway. If our attendance is sustainable for the next couple of years im pretty sure rogers will continue to increase payroll year by year, i mean win or lose sox/yankees fans are showing up to their ballparks. Rogers isn't going to go crazy after a year and a half of high attendance. I'm pretty sure they're spending some of the jays revenue on upgrading our crappy ballpark too

Attendance really doesn't matter as much as you are saying it is. Their Season Ticket base has doubled over the last few years and it would take 2-3 years in a row of losing/no hope for the future for you to lose those STH.

Even if the team is out of it in August there is still going to be 35K tickets sold to games in September

[Skin Blues]

Crazy thought: we trade Devon Travis for a position of need of similar value, sign Edwin, and slide Pearce to 2B. Even with being injured so much, Travis has been performing well and is getting a lot of fortunate outcomes on balls in play despite not much power and plate discipline that is scarily similar to Kevin Pillar's. I'm getting a Lawrie vibe with him in terms of the talent, injury proneness, and the feeling of projecting his success in partial season(s) to a potential full season, despite being yet to actually happen. What could we get from the Dodgers for him? Wouldn't be surprised to see something happen, there, but it'd probably have to be for similarly cost-controlled talent for the Jays to consider it.

It'd be selling low on Travis, and the suggestions of Pearce as a 2B are vastly overstated, IMO...he's 33 and has fewer than 250 career innings in middle infield. He can cover the position, which is useful, but that sounds like a recipe for Ryan Goins, Everyday Second Baseman to me.

I don't think Pearce could be any more injury prone than Travis. As for only 250 innings at 2B, they also happen to all come in the past 2 years and he actually did alright. On par with both Goins and Travis in terms of UZR, actually. He spent significant time in the OF in both his major and minor league career so mobility isn't likely a major concern. The Jays would know that better obviously so if they think he can't do it, it's a moot point. But it's an interesting angle, IMO.

And I also disagree that trading Travis is selling low, any more than trading away Lawrie was selling low. At this point he's a 25 year old defensively solid middle infielder with a career 119 wRC+ in over a season's worth of games and has been worth >2 WAR in both of his first two seasons. His trade value will likely never be higher than it is right now.

[Schad]

I don't think Pearce could be any more injury prone than Travis. As for only 250 innings at 2B, they also happen to all come in the past 2 years and he actually did alright. On par with both Goins and Travis in terms of UZR, actually. He spent significant time in the OF in both his major and minor league career so mobility isn't likely a major concern. The Jays would know that better obviously so if they think he can't do it, it's a moot point. But it's an interesting angle, IMO.

It's a sample equivalent to 28 games though, at an age when players are often moving away from middle infield to corner OF spots.

And I also disagree that trading Travis is selling low, any more than trading away Lawrie was selling low. At this point he's a 25 year old defensively solid middle infielder with a career 119 wRC+ in over a season's worth of games and has been worth >2 WAR in both of his first two seasons. His trade value will likely never be higher than it is right now.

Unless he has a season where he's more or less healthy, in which case it'll skyrocket. His career fWAR/650 is 4.7, but no one is paying full value for a guy coming off knee surgery.

[Skin Blues]

Unless he has a season where he's more or less healthy, in which case it'll skyrocket. His career fWAR/650 is 4.7, but no one is paying full value for a guy coming off knee surgery.

That's a little bit hyperbolic, but yes, of course if he puts up 4.7 WAR his value would be higher, but that goes for almost every player. But, not only has he never done that, it's not likely to happen, either. He could also remain injury prone, have his BABIP drop to league average levels, have his K% increase due to poor control of the strike zone, he could have a bad defensive year, or any number of things. There's no special insight we have that other teams don't have; we all know his flaws and his virtues and nobody has a crystal ball. So to say it's selling low is disingenuous, in my opinion.

As for Pearce at 2B, we'd be taking a hit defensively, almost for sure. And as I said, the team probably has a much better idea if putting him there is a good idea. But having Edwin's bat in the lineup rather than Travis makes up for that defensive downgrade so the net value from our infield would increase a lot (obviously, since we'd be spending $20M or so per year to upgrade it) and we would have another significant asset that Travis could bring back in a trade. If we can get Edwin on a 2 or 3 year deal, maybe with an opt-out to lower the cost, it could be very beneficial overall.

[Schad]

That's a little bit hyperbolic, but yes, of course if he puts up 4.7 WAR his value would be higher, but that goes for almost every player. But, not only has he never done that, it's not likely to happen, either. He could also remain injury prone, have his BABIP drop to league average levels, have his K% increase due to poor control of the strike zone, he could have a bad defensive year, or any number of things. There's no special insight we have that other teams don't have; we all know his flaws and his virtues and nobody has a crystal ball. So to say it's selling low is disingenuous, in my opinion.

I fail to see any hyperbole. The point is that he has been extremely productive when he has played, despite his flaws. But coming off surgery, his value will necessarily be lowered. I'd rather risk the fact that his injury issues are bad luck and that he can remain an above-average bat than ship him out and create a hole at a position that we have struggled for years to fill, when our only internal options are an older player with minimal 2B experience, a guy who flat-out cannot hit, and a AA prospect who is at least a couple years away and whose K:BB ratio parallels that of Travis without the power.

As for Pearce at 2B, we'd be taking a hit defensively, almost for sure. And as I said, the team probably has a much better idea if putting him there is a good idea. But having Edwin's bat in the lineup rather than Travis makes up for that defensive downgrade so the net value from our infield would increase a lot (obviously, since we'd be spending $20M or so per year to upgrade it) and we would have another significant asset that Travis could bring back in a trade. If we can get Edwin on a 2 or 3 year deal, maybe with an opt-out to lower the cost, it could be very beneficial overall.

I'm still entirely unclear as to how this brings back Edwin, for that matter; we don't have the money if we want to have a bullpen, from all appearances. And no, having an opt-out would not be terribly beneficial...if we hang around the Wild Card race, it just means that we're highly likely to lose him for nothing, rather than getting back a comp pick, because he is no longer eligible for a QO per the new CBA.

We're not going to trade Travis at this time for a top-level, MLB-ready, cost-controlled young OF. Not until he's healthy again. So instead, we'd be looking at another short-term move with potential long-term ramifications. I'd really rather we stop making those.

[Skin Blues]

I'd rather risk the fact that his injury issues are bad luck and that he can remain an above-average bat than ship him out and create a hole at a position that we have struggled for years to fill

And do you have any information the Dodgers (or some other team) don't have? If not, why wouldn't they also rather risk the fact that his injury issues are bad luck and that he can remain an above-average bat? His value to us is the same as his value to another team, all else being equal. Yeah it's nice having a good young second basemen, but if we can cash him in for a big prospect haul and then land Edwin on a team-friendly deal by sliding Pearce over there for the next two seasons it may benefit us. Again... this obviously is prefaced on the idea that Pearce can do that. 2B is not really a physically demanding position that players in their mid-30s struggle with. Not many guys move off of 2B to another position like they do from 3B or SS; the short throw gives a lot of room for error.

I'm still entirely unclear as to how this brings back Edwin, for that matter; we don't have the money if we want to have a bullpen, from all appearances.

Who are we going to sign for the bullpen that stops us from being able to afford Edwin? Jerry Blevins?? We can also trade to fill holes, which, if we get a few useful prospects in return for Travis, becomes a lot easier to do and more palatable.

And no, having an opt-out would not be terribly beneficial...if we hang around the Wild Card race, it just means that we're highly likely to lose him for nothing, rather than getting back a comp pick, because he is no longer eligible for a QO per the new CBA.

The effect of an opt-out is to lower the cost (both AAV and up-front cost), so yeah, it would be beneficial since about one paragraph ago you were worried about not having enough money to sign him in the first place. There is no comp pick in play at all, for anybody that signs him, so it's a non-factor. Don't know why you'd mention that part; the lack of benefit of the comp pick would be baked into the contract from Day 1.

We're not going to trade Travis at this time for a top-level, MLB-ready, cost-controlled young OF. Not until he's healthy again. So instead, we'd be looking at another short-term move with potential long-term ramifications. I'd really rather we stop making those.

We don't need to trade him for an MLB ready cost-controlled OF. We might get a big pitching prospect for him, and swap another prospect for an outfielder, or we might keep the prospects and sign Brandon Moss, or any number of things to fill out the roster. Any specific series of trades or signings is always unlikely to take place.

I don't think it's likely we trade Travis away, just exploring options that could allow us to extract some extra value out of Pearce's defensive flexibility, or from Edwin's preference to stay in Toronto for a below-market price (if that's even the case), or avoid the uncertainty of Travis' health and performance. It'd be nice to have both Travis and Pearce and just use Pearce to spell Travis occasionally, too. But other than adding a corner OF or two, which we'll probably do either way, there's not many other ways to wedge a big bat like Edwin's into the lineup the way it's currently constructed.

[Schad]

And do you have any information the Dodgers (or some other team) don't have? If not, why wouldn't they also rather risk the fact that his injury issues are bad luck and that he can remain an above-average bat? His value to us is the same as his value to another team, all else being equal. Yeah it's nice having a good young second basemen, but if we can cash him in for a big prospect haul and then land Edwin on a team-friendly deal by sliding Pearce over there for the next two seasons it may benefit us. Again... this obviously is prefaced on the idea that Pearce can do that. 2B is not really a physically demanding position that players in their mid-30s struggle with. Not many guys move off of 2B to another position like they do from 3B or SS; the short throw gives a lot of room for error.

They'd risk it, sure. They wouldn't risk it for "a big prospect haul". That's utter fantasy.

Who are we going to sign for the bullpen that stops us from being able to afford Edwin? Jerry Blevins?? We can also trade to fill holes, which, if we get a few useful prospects in return for Travis, becomes a lot easier to do and more palatable.

We currently have less than $25m remaining. And that's with multiple roster spots to fill, even with cheap options.

The effect of an opt-out is to lower the cost (both AAV and up-front cost), so yeah, it would be beneficial since about one paragraph ago you were worried about not having enough money to sign him in the first place. There is no comp pick in play at all, for anybody that signs him, so it's a non-factor. Don't know why you'd mention that part; the lack of benefit of the comp pick would be baked into the contract from Day 1.

Because there are two problems. One, we'd have to reshuffle the roster just to squeeze him in. Two, it'd be for a shot at the Wild Card in all likelihood, after which we'd lose him for free. Choosing the first to chase the second is bad long-term planning.

We don't need to trade him for an MLB ready cost-controlled OF. We might get a big pitching prospect for him, and swap another prospect for an outfielder, or we might keep the prospects and sign Brandon Moss, or any number of things to fill out the roster. Any specific series of trades or signings is always unlikely to take place.

We might also get a unicorn. If Travis proves he can be healthy, he might actually return such. Right now though, no one's going to trade peak value for a guy who has had three serious injuries in two years, hence my comment about selling low.

I don't think it's likely we trade Travis away, just exploring options that could allow us to extract some extra value out of Pearce's defensive flexibility, or from Edwin's preference to stay in Toronto for a below-market price (if that's even the case), or avoid the uncertainty of Travis' health and performance. It'd be nice to have both Travis and Pearce and just use Pearce to spell Travis occasionally, too. But other than adding a corner OF or two, which we'll probably do either way, there's not many other ways to wedge a big bat like Edwin's into the lineup the way it's currently constructed.

There aren't many ways to wedge Encarnacion's bat in, no. That's why we have largely moved on. We came into this offseason in a situation where we had two options, really, given our payroll situation: re-sign EE, and leave some holes open, or try to have above-average options in as many spots as possible, but without EE. Filling all of the holes and re-signing EE? Never in the budget.

[IMAN5]

When EE turned down the Jays offer, his agent likely told Shapiro they were entertaining better offers from teams like Boston and New York. At the time, that seemed like a reasonable assumption. No one here would dispute that as being a legitimate scenario.

So Shapiro felt he had to act fast to find a replacement and he signed Morales. As we now know, there were no other better offers for EE. His agent was bullshutting the Jays.

But how were the Jays to know that? What if Boston and New York were actually interested and Shapiro waited only to lose out on EE in the end and have no replacement because Morales was gone? Then all the armchair GM's would be criticizing Shapiro for not being proactive.

spot on.