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

Post #81 » by **LittleOzzy** » Fri Sep 9, 2011 1:51 pm

Will the vault now be located in their new fancy bank?

I think we need to face facts that Rogers make a lot more money off their other proprieties and that's all they care about.

Homer Jay · Post #82 » by **Homer Jay** » Fri Sep 9, 2011 1:57 pm

Mak wrote: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?

Fielder... probably not. But Pujols very likely. He is an all-time great, arguably amongst the top 5 LHB ever. He's already almost at a career 90 WAR and he's only 31. He could realistically finish around 140. You do not want to pass up that level of prestige.

tiger7 · Post #83 » by **tiger7** » Fri Sep 9, 2011 2:41 pm

Rogers is cheap as hell. I for one am not expecting them to do anything major. They'll probably go for mid level signings enough to get your hopes up for the following year but not enough to put us over the edge vs the Yankees and Red Sox where they can just write a blank check. Really they just want to have more cash grabs, not spend more money. Obviously they need some big free agent signings to shore up some gaps on our team like the bullpen, a few more starters as well as renovating the stadium but I'll believe it when I see it. Talk is cheap and Rogers has been full of s*** the past few years saying they're prepared to spend. You have to realize Ted Rogers is dead and its a business not a private owner in charge with lined pockets.

Skin Blues · Post #84 » by **Skin Blues** » Fri Sep 9, 2011 2:47 pm

Mak wrote: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?

You can't justify 10/300 by saying their payroll is only x dollars. Or because Bautista is underpaid. Those aren't valid reasons to pay more than you think a guy is worth. 30 a year isn't a huge deal for a couple years. It's the last 5, 6, 7 years that they should be worried about. Being able to afford it isn't an excuse to be reckless. I'm all-for bringin in Pujols, but I don't think they'll be willing to toss around money the way some people think they will... they should be smart about it.

TorontoRaptures · Post #85 » by **TorontoRaptures** » Fri Sep 9, 2011 3:08 pm

Mak wrote: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?

It's just not going to happen.
-The biggest contract ever in baseball is 10 years/275million to A-ROD. (Heck, if I'm not mistaken, that's the biggest contract in sports history). You really think Rogers is going to top the Yankees and pay out the biggest contract ever? LOL.
-Pujols is 31. Rogers won't give him a 10 year contract. Maybe the Yankees could afford to eat a few years if he drops off at 36 or 37, but the Jays are in no way in a position to have 30 million dollars a year not producing for several seasons.
-The pitching in Toronto is still suspect. If they spend on Pujols, they'd then have to also spend on pitching. There's no way you can throw 300 million at Pujols and then rely on Morrow as your #2. You'd have to go out and sign a front end starter, IMO. This makes this whole Pujols proposal even more expensive for Toronto.

Rogers needs to spend but they are not throwing 300 million at anyone. They'll up their spending, but they'll still be well behind teams like NY, BOS, TEX, LAA, etc. If the team starts winning and 50K people start showing up every night, then we may see them spend more.

satyr9 · Post #86 » by **satyr9** » Fri Sep 9, 2011 3:14 pm

Homer Jay wrote:
Mak wrote: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?

Fielder... probably not. But Pujols very likely. He is an all-time great, arguably amongst the top 5 LHB ever. He's already almost at a career 90 WAR and he's only 31. He could realistically finish around 140. You do not want to pass up that level of prestige.

Pujols is not a LHB, other than that okay.

sonn · Post #87 » by **sonn** » Fri Sep 9, 2011 4:02 pm

baulderdash77 wrote: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.

Signing a relief pitcher to big money is the stupid signing you can do in baseball. Do people already forget the disaster BJ Ryan was? You fill the bullpen with cheap free agents and from within the organization. For all the spending Boston and New York do it's very rarely on the bullpen and when they do it's usually on homegrown talent like Rivera and Papelbon.

BigLeagueChew · Post #88 » by **BigLeagueChew** » Fri Sep 9, 2011 4:08 pm

lol i think he meant CJ Wilson not Brian. Brian Wilson is signed until the end of 2012 anyways.

Mak · Post #89 » by **Mak** » Fri Sep 9, 2011 4:08 pm

TorontoRaptures wrote:-The biggest contract ever in baseball is 10 years/275million to A-ROD. (Heck, if I'm not mistaken, that's the biggest contract in sports history). You really think Rogers is going to top the Yankees and pay out the biggest contract ever? LOL.
-Pujols is 31. Rogers won't give him a 10 year contract. Maybe the Yankees could afford to eat a few years if he drops off at 36 or 37, but the Jays are in no way in a position to have 30 million dollars a year not producing for several seasons.
-The pitching in Toronto is still suspect. If they spend on Pujols, they'd then have to also spend on pitching. There's no way you can throw 300 million at Pujols and then rely on Morrow as your #2. You'd have to go out and sign a front end starter, IMO. This makes this whole Pujols proposal even more expensive for Toronto.

Rogers needs to spend but they are not throwing 300 million at anyone. They'll up their spending, but they'll still be well behind teams like NY, BOS, TEX, LAA, etc. If the team starts winning and 50K people start showing up every night, then we may see them spend more.

1. I dont think people understand what is going on here. Players like Pujols are not available eveyr year. If it does not work out they can always move them. Somebody will give him biggest contract in sports. He is on pace to be one of the top 10 hitters ever to play the game.
2. 30 million per year won't sound this crazy 5 years from now. A-Rod is making 30 right now. Wells is making 26m. You think Rogers was ready to pay Wells 26m but won't pay one of the best players ever 30?
3. We both know Morrow won't be our 2nd starter, why would you even say that?
4. Waiting for 50K people is not going to work. I think that is pretty clear. Spending money on Pujols will.

Mak · Post #90 » by **Mak** » Fri Sep 9, 2011 4:13 pm

Skin Blues wrote:
Mak wrote: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?

You can't justify 10/300 by saying their payroll is only x dollars. Or because Bautista is underpaid. Those aren't valid reasons to pay more than you think a guy is worth. 30 a year isn't a huge deal for a couple years. It's the last 5, 6, 7 years that they should be worried about. Being able to afford it isn't an excuse to be reckless. I'm all-for bringin in Pujols, but I don't think they'll be willing to toss around money the way some people think they will... they should be smart about it.

What you said does not make sense to me. Why does not our payroll matter when talking about signing him? I don't get it. We have money to spend because our payroll is low. Simple economics, no? You save money in one spot, spend it elsewhere?

Am I wrong to say that if Batista was making 25m it would be less likely for Rogers to spend money on another 25m+ player?

Mak · Post #91 » by **Mak** » Fri Sep 9, 2011 4:23 pm

tiger7 wrote:Rogers is cheap as hell. I for one am not expecting them to do anything major. They'll probably go for mid level signings enough to get your hopes up for the following year but not enough to put us over the edge vs the Yankees and Red Sox where they can just write a blank check. Really they just want to have more cash grabs, not spend more money. Obviously they need some big free agent signings to shore up some gaps on our team like the bullpen, a few more starters as well as renovating the stadium but I'll believe it when I see it. Talk is cheap and Rogers has been full of s*** the past few years saying they're prepared to spend. You have to realize Ted Rogers is dead and its a business not a private owner in charge with lined pockets.

What do you think our payroll will be 2 years from now?

sonn · Post #92 » by **sonn** » Fri Sep 9, 2011 4:39 pm

BigLeagueChew wrote:lol i think he meant CJ Wilson not Brian. Brian Wilson is signed until the end of 2012 anyways.

He said "plus a closer".

Homer Jay · Post #93 » by **Homer Jay** » Fri Sep 9, 2011 4:47 pm

satyr9 wrote:
Homer Jay wrote:
Mak wrote: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?

Fielder... probably not. But Pujols very likely. He is an all-time great, arguably amongst the top 5 LHB ever. He's already almost at a career 90 WAR and he's only 31. He could realistically finish around 140. You do not want to pass up that level of prestige.

Pujols is not a LHB, other than that okay.

Yeah I saw that after. I was thinking right, then looked up the Top WAR list (which is dominated by Lefties), and then had that in my brain. He stands out even further as a RHB. If you put him above Mays and Aaron, you can call him the best ever.

BigLeagueChew · Post #94 » by **BigLeagueChew** » Fri Sep 9, 2011 4:50 pm

sonn wrote:
BigLeagueChew wrote:lol i think he meant CJ Wilson not Brian. Brian Wilson is signed until the end of 2012 anyways.

He said "plus a closer".

my bad

Mak · Post #95 » by **Mak** » Wed Sep 14, 2011 12:19 am

Filder is not coming here. Bob Eliot says that Jays have 0 interest in him.

Post #96 » by **Geddy** » Wed Sep 14, 2011 2:52 am

It's just speculation from some "evaluator" and I don't think that news comes directly from anyone in the organization

“From talking with the Jays they have zero interest in Fielder,” said one evaluator. “The Jays are now into athletic players, look at their draft choice the previous two years.

“Prince Fielder does not have an athletic body now at age 27, he won’t have one next year at age 28 and he certainly won’t have one at the end of a four or five year contract.”

CapeCrusader · Post #97 » by **CapeCrusader** » Wed Sep 14, 2011 3:26 am

I think AA is smart enough to realize that we need a player of Fielder's caliber. One can only believe he would go for a player like Fielder with the recent transactions to the team.

Weems · Post #98 » by **Weems** » Wed Sep 14, 2011 4:22 am

In the draft and with developing pieces we may look for upside/projection, and athletic ability helps with that, but this is totally separate from the draft. We know who Fielder is as a player.

I don't know what "from talking with the Jays" means, though. There must be zero truth to that. It's dumb.

Post #99 » by **Schad** » Wed Sep 14, 2011 4:33 am

It is dumb. The mere idea that the team's desire for athletic players has any bearing on what they'd look for in a first baseman is dumb.

Mak · Post #100 » by **Mak** » Wed Sep 14, 2011 4:46 am

Schadenfreude wrote:It is dumb. The mere idea that the team's desire for athletic players has any bearing on what they'd look for in a first baseman is dumb.

I disagree. If a guy can't get in good shape in contract year I'd be worried about his future after he gets a 7+ year deal. How much more weight would he have to carry for you to have a second thought?