Time for Rogers to open vault to get Jays to next level

[Hendrix]

I hope we go hard after Pujols, Darvish, and or CJ Wilson. That sounds like a competitive team.

[Avenger]

But to get to 90+ wins in this division, we need to be able to absolutely murder the baseball. Why? Look at Yankees Stadium. Look at Fenway. Look at the Trop. Hell, look at the Dome. All parks that play as very strong hitters' parks, and to win in such stadia, you need to have slugging up and down the lineup.

This is complete nonsense IMO. The way to winning baseball games is the same in every division and in every ballpark no matter how hitter friendly or how pitcher friendly they might be. You score runs on offence and you limit runs on pitching and defence. Those three things are just as important individually in Fenway as they would be in Petco. Its just as crucial to pitch better than your opponents in Fenway to win games as it is to outhit them and vice versa in Petco.

Just because you're playing in band box or in a division full of bandboxes(the Trop is not a hitter friendly stadium BTW) doesn't mean you have to slug your way into the playoffs. You could achieve the same results by limiting runs on pitching and defence. That's exactly what the Tampa Bay Rays have done, over the last three years the Jays have a significantly higher wOBA than the Rays even though the Rays are ahead by like 50 games in the standings over the same time period. The Rays have had better defence and pitching that more than makes up for their relatively mediocre offense.

Yet we've averaged 3.6 runs a game at Fenway, 3.8 a game at Yankees Stadium, and a woeful 2.7 at the Trop.

I don't know if these numbers really mean anything. They're based on small sample sizes where the Jays just probably ran into incredibly good pitching, do you really think the Jays have some sort of a fatal flaw when it comes to hitting in those ballparks despite having a relatively good offence overall?

Sell out on pitching and we're still swimming largely **** if we right our record against those divisional opponents...we're fourteen games below .500 against the Yanks, Sox and Rays; against the rest of the league, we're 55-43, which is a 91 win pace.

I guess this is where we really disagree, i want the Jays to go all out on starting pitching and the bullpen even if the biggest upgrade to the offence is gonna be Kelly Johnson. I feel like that's a more efficient way to getting into contention because of the nature of young pitchers. We could throw out the Drabeks, Carrenos, Alvarezs, Mcguires and Jenkins of the world(all of whom are ridiculously overrated by Blue Jays fans BTW, Alvarez might be the only big league pitcher there) but young pitchers are notoriously unreliable. We're more likely to waste a year of Bautista by not upgrading with veteran proven pitching than we would be by not upgrading at 1B with Fielder.

[Michael Bradley]

I guess this is where we really disagree, i want the Jays to go all out on starting pitching and the bullpen even if the biggest upgrade to the offence is gonna be Kelly Johnson. I feel like that's a more efficient way to getting into contention because of the nature of young pitchers. We could throw out the Drabeks, Carrenos, Alvarezs, Mcguires and Jenkins of the world(all of whom are ridiculously overrated by Blue Jays fans BTW, Alvarez might be the only big league pitcher there) but young pitchers are notoriously unreliable. We're more likely to waste a year of Bautista by not upgrading with veteran proven pitching than we would be by not upgrading at 1B with Fielder.

I agree with part of the above (depending on pitching prospects is a bad, bad, bad idea), but the Jays do not have the depth of pitching talent that the Rays have in order to get away with a middle of the pack lineup. Price and Shields alone (9.5 WAR) are better than practically every pitcher the Jays have thrown out there this year combined. Then you factor Hellickson, Niemann, etc. It is a gap that Darvish alone is not going to make up. Darvish and Jackson may not even make it up.

The Jays don't appear to be great at anything. Middle of the pack all around (lineup, rotation, and bullpen). That is why if they add a hitter (Pujols/Fielder) AND a pitcher (Darvish), it lessens the gap a bit because they improved both areas. We saw what loading up on one can do (2008 team: great pitching, no hitting). Balance is better.

[Schad]

This is complete nonsense IMO. The way to winning baseball games is the same in every division and in every ballpark no matter how hitter friendly or how pitcher friendly they might be. You score runs on offence and you limit runs on pitching and defence. Those three things are just as important individually in Fenway as they would be in Petco. Its just as crucial to pitch better than your opponents in Fenway to win games as it is to outhit them and vice versa in Petco.

If you want to be trite, of course you need to both outhit and outpitch opposing teams. However, a team should be built around the defining characteristics of one's home park...and if possible, say because of a division that with several parks that play short, around the defining characteristics of your rivals as well. You wouldn't try to build a team of slugging slugs at Petco, and when the Padres won 90 last year, they didn't; Adrian Gonzalez was their lone power threat, and they otherwise built the team around the dimensions, including the use of an utterly abysmal hitter in center field, where he was still good for more than 2 WAR.

Just because you're playing in band box or in a division full of bandboxes(the Trop is not a hitter friendly stadium BTW) doesn't mean you have to slug your way into the playoffs.

You're right on the Trop, and it's why I shouldn't post at 3am.

You could achieve the same results by limiting runs on pitching and defence. That's exactly what the Tampa Bay Rays have done, over the last three years the Jays have a significantly higher wOBA than the Rays even though the Rays are ahead by like 50 games in the standings over the same time period. The Rays have had better defence and pitching that more than makes up for their relatively mediocre offense.

Their relatively mediocre offense scored more runs than we did in each of 2008, 2009 and 2010; part of that was luck, as they consistently exceeded their expected run totals by the advanced metrics, but when talking about their win total, a run is a run. They had excellent pitching, but those teams also knocked them in at a considerable clip.

I don't know if these numbers really mean anything. They're based on small sample sizes where the Jays just probably ran into incredibly good pitching, do you really think the Jays have some sort of a fatal flaw when it comes to hitting in those ballparks despite having a relatively good offence overall?

Those teams haven't had incredibly good pitching...what they have had is strikeout pitchers and some groundball artists, which are what really play in Fenway and Yankees Stadium (especially with the hometown strike zone in both parks), and which has tended to do a number of our swing-and-miss artists. The reverse doesn't work as well simply because they field teams that are patient and have good plate awareness beyond their power; it's pretty damned difficult to go in there and win 3-2. Even Tampa didn't...they were 6-3 at Fenway last year because despite allowing 5.4 runs/game, they knocked in 6.9 runs/game. Same deal against the Yankees...surrendered 5.8 runs/game, scored 7, went 5-4. Wasn't small ball hitting, either; they had home runs in 14 of 18 games, and hit 27 total.

I guess this is where we really disagree, i want the Jays to go all out on starting pitching and the bullpen even if the biggest upgrade to the offence is gonna be Kelly Johnson. I feel like that's a more efficient way to getting into contention because of the nature of young pitchers. We could throw out the Drabeks, Carrenos, Alvarezs, Mcguires and Jenkins of the world(all of whom are ridiculously overrated by Blue Jays fans BTW, Alvarez might be the only big league pitcher there) but young pitchers are notoriously unreliable. We're more likely to waste a year of Bautista by not upgrading with veteran proven pitching than we would be by not upgrading at 1B with Fielder.

There are perhaps 10-15 proven pitchers who you can be sure will succeed year in and year out, and none of them are available. Therein lies the problem.


Believe me, I don't think that we should be all-offense/no-pitching, but we'd be best-served getting one monstrous bat before turning our focus to the staff.

And I'm not sure who is overrating the likes of McGuire and Jenkins, unless "might be a serviceable back-of-the-rotation pitcher" counts in your books.

[satyr9]

Based on the source of those last two quotes you're starting to argue with yourself schad, which is never a good sign.

[Schad]

Never underestimate my incompetence at basic tasks.

[There There]

We could throw out the Drabeks, Carrenos, Alvarezs, Mcguires and Jenkins of the world(all of whom are ridiculously overrated by Blue Jays fans BTW, Alvarez might be the only big league pitcher there) but young pitchers are notoriously unreliable.

And yet, young arms are primarily the reason why the Rays have maintained their level of competitiveness over the past couple of seasons.

Throwing the majority of your offseason spending at two pitchers is not a responsible approach to spending money... Buying arms is a dangerous approach. Arms fall apart at too high a rate to make buying them a financially responsible approach to building a team.

Every player that has started for the Rays in the last couple of years were drafted by the Rays. Even in their 97 win season, the only non-home grown pitchers to start for them were Garza and Kazmir, both of whom they obtained in ridiculously lopsided trades.

If Anthopolous can obtain young, controllable legit mid rotation guys for scraps, then by all means go ahead.

But if we're buying on the open market, we are better off spending on elite bats than trying to fill out the rotation.

Even his draft strategy suggests that this rotation will continually be filled out from within as much as possible. Draft as many projectable high upside arms as you can and the odds are good that a couple will pan out.

As I mentioned before, Darvish could be the exception here only because it's likely that a good percentage of any money thrown at him will eventually be made up in extra revenue. It's also the reason though why this organization should be chasing him in addition to someone like Fielder as opposed to instead of someone like Fielder.

[StringerBell]

If AA doesn't make legit offers to Fielder AND Wilson this off season Rogers can kiss off.

[Schad]

If AA doesn't make legit offers to Fielder AND Wilson this off season Rogers can kiss off.

So if we go after Fielder and, say, Darvish, you'll be pissed because it wasn't Wilson? Wilson is pretty likely to re-sign in Texas.

[Michael Bradley]

If we don't make a legit run at Albert Pujols, I would be pretty upset. Whether he would want to sign with Toronto is a different story, but we have the money, the open position, and the best player in baseball already on the roster. No excuse not to make a run at Pujols. In an off year the man has a 5.0 WAR and .916 OPS.

Fielder should be the fallback option.

[StringerBell]

If AA doesn't make legit offers to Fielder AND Wilson this off season Rogers can kiss off.

So if we go after Fielder and, say, Darvish, you'll be pissed because it wasn't Wilson? Wilson is pretty likely to re-sign in Texas.

Fielder and Wilson are my prefered choices. If they go after say Pujols and Darvish instead, I'd be thrilled . I just want the team to make a legit play after an elite middle of the line-up bat (to protect Joey Bats) and a front of the rotation pitcher.

[CrymeTime]

I say we go all in. Not sure how much it would cost Rogers.

Signing estimates: Fielder, Pujols, Wilson, Fielder, McDonald

Lineup:
SS/2B- Escobar
CF- Rasmus
RF- Bautista
1B/DH- Fielder
DH/1B- Pujols
3B- Lawrie
LF- Thames
C- Arencibia
2B/SS- Hechavarria (Defense is MLB ready, might aswell get him MLB ABs in a stacked lineup)

Bench: Encarnacion, McDonald, Davis, Molina

Starting Rotation:
Romero
Morrow
Wilson
Darvish
Alvarez

Bullpen:
McGowan
Villanueva
Janssen
Cecil
Carreno
Perez
Drabek

Any of the Bullpen guys can make emergency starts, and throw 80+ pitches. You can use them in multiple days, for multiple innings.


What do you think? Would we give the Yankees and Red Sox a run for their money?

[Homer Jay]

If we don't make a legit run at Albert Pujols, I would be pretty upset. Whether he would want to sign with Toronto is a different story, but we have the money, the open position, and the best player in baseball already on the roster. No excuse not to make a run at Pujols. In an off year the man has a 5.0 WAR and .916 OPS.

Fielder should be the fallback option.

I still think the general vibe around MLB is that Pujols will re-sign with the Cards. I know the negotiations were rough, and the relationship with LaRussa strained, but he more than likely will remain a Card. It seems to be getting back in vogue that a true all-time great plays with one team his whole career, and that leaving as a FA seems to take you down a peg. It seems more likely at this point that the Cards will jettison LaRussa finally if it takes that to retain Pujols.

If he does hit the market, all bets are off with everybody, including the Yankees and Red Sox. Texeira, Gonzalez or Ortiz would lovingly get the heave-ho from management to bring Pujols on board.

[hyper316]

I say we go all in. Not sure how much it would cost Rogers.

Signing estimates: Fielder, Pujols, Wilson, Fielder, McDonald

I know Prince Fielder is a big man... no need to sign him twice ....

jk, anyway this is just straight dreaming. bluejays would be happy to get one of the three (pujol, fielder, wilson), getting all three is crazy talk and does not align with what AA has been doing - building within and adding pieces when the time is right.

[Michael Bradley]

I also think Pujols will end up re-signing with the Cardinals (if they paid $17M a year to Holliday, I'm sure they will spend the necessary coin to keep Pujols). However, stranger things have happened. If Pujols tests free agency, then AA better bring his sales pitch. There are only so many chances to sign a player of this calibre. Look what happened to Boston after they signed Manny. Take advantage of these situations.

[Schad]

What do you think? Would we give the Yankees and Red Sox a run for their money?

I somewhat doubt that we're going to run up a $170m payroll, plus shelling out $50m for Darvish's posting fee. It's also pretty unrealistic that all of them would sign here.

[baulderdash77]

If we sign one of Darvish, Wilson or Fielder plus a closer I think we're going to be pushing 90 wins next year. Remember there's a lot of natural development of the kids that we're taking for granted to come.

But I think that Rogers is aware that the fanbase is looking for some kind of major signing this year after sitting out the last few years. I think they're going to play ball too.

[Mak]

I also think Pujols will end up re-signing with the Cardinals (if they paid $17M a year to Holliday, I'm sure they will spend the necessary coin to keep Pujols). However, stranger things have happened. If Pujols tests free agency, then AA better bring his sales pitch. There are only so many chances to sign a player of this calibre. Look what happened to Boston after they signed Manny. Take advantage of these situations.

Cardinal's last offer i think was 200m/8 years. There is a point money wise that he would have to say yes to AA's offer. I don't know how much more it would have to be than Cardinals but there is that number. Is Rogers ready to give him 300m over 10 years?

I know I'll have to get cable back to watch Jays if that happens. Pujols would bring so much revenue to the team. I think it would be one of those signings that next week Jays sell enough tickets to get 5k bump in attendance for every home game. TV ratings will go up. Rogers will make that money back.

[TorontoRaptures]

There is no way Rogers will spend 300 million over 10 years.

[Mak]

Just giving Pujols 30m might bring their payroll around 100m... why is that so crazy? When rumors are they are ready to spend a lot more than that if needed. We are paying Batista way bellow market value, between 2 of them they'd only make 40-45m.

A Rod and Teixeira will make around 55m next year. If they Rogers is serious about spending money why is there no way?

It's not even close how much better Batista/Pujols combo would be. Boston and Yankees have 1B who make 20m + , i don't think either of them would like DHing. Would Boston or Yankees go after Fielder/Pujols?