Report: Anthopoulos returning to Jays next season

Back2back2back · Post #1 » by **Back2back2back** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 2:19 pm

http://www.torontosun.com/2014/08/16/blue-jays-gm-alex-anthopoulos-set-to-return-next-year

Your thoughts?

Back2back2back · Post #2 » by **Back2back2back** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 3:12 pm

30 views and no responses.

I guess you guys are fine with him returning next season.

Sifu · Post #3 » by **Sifu** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 3:35 pm

He has done well enough to keep on. The things that many fans were upset about this year are likely not fully in his power to control.

Next year will be a crucible though. If the team appears to not be serious contenders, will he have enough guts to trade his vets for prospects, and position a run with his young and promising pitching staff?

Sent from my Nexus 4 using RealGM Forums mobile app

dagger · Post #4 » by **dagger** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 3:43 pm

Back2back2back wrote:30 views and no responses.

I guess you guys are fine with him returning next season.

At this point, it's hard to ascertain what the team will do next season. The payroll supposedly may go up, but it's not clear if that will be enough to improve the talent they already have, or even keep it at the current level. If the idea is to tread water, win 85 games while acclimating our young pitchers to the majors, any GM can do that. Heck, we hardly made any moves since the end of the 2013 season, so why fire AA if the plan isn't to make more profound changes?

Back2back2back · Post #5 » by **Back2back2back** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 4:19 pm

I hear you both.

Giving him one more year is fair I guess.

I do give him credit on making that big trade with Miami, and bringing in Dickey. It did change the look of the team and has made us a competitive team this year, and for once we have meaningful games to play in August.

Post #6 » by **Schad** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 6:12 pm

dagger wrote:At this point, it's hard to ascertain what the team will do next season. The payroll supposedly may go up, but it's not clear if that will be enough to improve the talent they already have, or even keep it at the current level. If the idea is to tread water, win 85 games while acclimating our young pitchers to the majors, any GM can do that. Heck, we hardly made any moves since the end of the 2013 season, so why fire AA if the plan isn't to make more profound changes?

Does suggest that our options are likely to be somewhere on that muddle through/genuinely improve continuum rather than attempting a rebuild, though.

Michael Bradley · Post #7 » by **Michael Bradley** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 6:56 pm

Alex won't rebuild, so ownership better spend money next season. If they don't, and the fans have to endure another off-season like last year's, then I'm not sure that will go over very well.

I've warmed up to the idea of rebuilding honestly, but I'm not against going for it with Bautista and Edwin again. All I ask is they go 100% in one direction. What they did in the off-season and the trade deadline this year was an embarrassment.

MikeM · Post #8 » by **MikeM** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 7:00 pm

I want to see AA manage the team without Beeston for at least one year. I'm never going to believe that the Marlins and Mets trades were because AA suddenly wanted to contend immediately after being so patient.

torontoaces04 · Post #9 » by **torontoaces04** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 7:05 pm

Are the Jays making money? Yes, so Rogers is happy.
Is AA staying? Yep.

AA will be around for as long as the Jays keep making more and more money each year. He gets evaluated based on the $$$ the team brings in. Does overall record contribute to the amount of $$$ the Jays make?...sure, a little bit.

Post #10 » by **Schad** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 7:20 pm

torontoaces04 wrote:Are the Jays making money? Yes, so Rogers is happy.
Is AA staying? Yep.

AA will be around for as long as the Jays keep making more and more money each year. He gets evaluated based on the $$$ the team brings in. Does overall record contribute to the amount of $$$ the Jays make?...sure, a little bit.

Not sure we made much money last year. Might be doing better this season with the TV ratings spiking, but with the club increasingly looking as if it'll fall out of contention, that's unlikely to last.

Dan2087 · Post #11 » by **Dan2087** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 7:31 pm

I'm fine with it, but if ownership isn't giving AA the flexibility needed to improve this team I don't see the point. If its going to be another offseason like the one we had I'd rather blow it up

Waylon Mercy · Post #12 » by **Waylon Mercy** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 7:54 pm

Next year should be do or die for him

dagger · Post #13 » by **dagger** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 9:15 pm

Schadenfreude wrote:
dagger wrote:At this point, it's hard to ascertain what the team will do next season. The payroll supposedly may go up, but it's not clear if that will be enough to improve the talent they already have, or even keep it at the current level. If the idea is to tread water, win 85 games while acclimating our young pitchers to the majors, any GM can do that. Heck, we hardly made any moves since the end of the 2013 season, so why fire AA if the plan isn't to make more profound changes?

Does suggest that our options are likely to be somewhere on that muddle through/genuinely improve continuum rather than attempting a rebuild, though.

The key may be whether the players start making trade demands. If Jose/Edwin ask out, or if Melky flees, this could easily become a rebuild of necessity rather than choice.

Mehar · Post #14 » by **Mehar** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 9:23 pm

Waylon Mercy wrote:Next year should be do or die for him

This year should have been do or die for him. He could have made trades to help this team without adding payroll. The Jays could have traded Juan Francisco for Chase Headley for crying out loud, with the Padres eating all of Headley's salary for the rest of the year. He should have been let go based on that stupidity alone.

http://www.torontosun.com/2014/07/26/bl ... se-headley

C Court · Post #15 » by **C Court** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 10:18 pm

Keith Pelley of Rogers told Sportsnet that no decisions have been made. Simmons report seems premature.

What if the Jays play .400 ball the rest of the way and finish way back? Too early to know what's going to happen with AA.

Randle McMurphy · Post #16 » by **Randle McMurphy** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 10:37 pm

Centre Court wrote:Keith Pelley of Rogers told Sportsnet that no decisions have been made. Simmons report seems premature.

What if the Jays play .400 ball the rest of the way and finish way back? Too early to know what's going to happen with AA.

I doubt Rogers get rid of him, but I agree, it seems ridiculous for a report like this to come out now. So much can change.

Michael Bradley · Post #17 » by **Michael Bradley** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 10:55 pm

Well, giving him no extra resources during the off-season or trade deadline in one of the final years of this roster's "window" certainly did not give off the impression that they want him back, or care too much about this team's ability to compete. Keeping him means he's going to need the resources next season that he did not get this season, probably even more with having to find replacements in LF, CF, 2B, and (if he really wants to win) catcher. He certainly will not rebuild.

It will be interesting to see what happens. I'm almost hoping this team collapses because I don't trust Rogers to invest in this team any further and going for status quo again next year will just set the team back even further. I'm not even a fan of prospects like some here are. The majority of them bust. However, if they have no intention of adding pieces around Bautista and Edwin, then it's really pointless to keep them around.

C Court · Post #18 » by **C Court** » Sun Aug 17, 2014 11:31 pm

Pelley said that money was available, but the Jays never requested authorization for more cash because the right deal wasn't there.

Randle McMurphy · Post #19 » by **Randle McMurphy** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 12:07 am

Centre Court wrote:Pelley said that money was available, but the Jays never requested authorization for more cash because the right deal wasn't there.

Unfortunately, that doesn't quite explain the entire Ervin Santana ridiculousness where the team had to ask its own players to defer money to make room for his salary. Can't say I buy Pelley's story.

Randle McMurphy · Post #20 » by **Randle McMurphy** » Mon Aug 18, 2014 12:10 am

Michael Bradley wrote:Well, giving him no extra resources during the off-season or trade deadline in one of the final years of this roster's "window" certainly did not give off the impression that they want him back, or care too much about this team's ability to compete. Keeping him means he's going to need the resources next season that he did not get this season, probably even more with having to find replacements in LF, CF, 2B, and (if he really wants to win) catcher. He certainly will not rebuild.

It will be interesting to see what happens. I'm almost hoping this team collapses because I don't trust Rogers to invest in this team any further and going for status quo again next year will just set the team back even further. I'm not even a fan of prospects like some here are. The majority of them bust. However, if they have no intention of adding pieces around Bautista and Edwin, then it's really pointless to keep them around.

I'd expect them to keep more or less the same roster with some reductions in payroll (letting Melky/Rasmus go for cheaper options, possibly moving Buehrle/Dickey to make room for the young guys, etc.). Hard to see Rogers adding salary again, but I also don't see a rebuild happening with the same GM in place.