RealGM

Anthopolous talks about his new gig

Beeston talks about Anthopolous, and the same old stuff he always talks about. Looks like this one isn't up yet, I'll link when it is. The biggest piece of news here is that apparently the new prez/CEO will have the ability to replace Anthopolous if he so chooses, but Beeston will strongly discourage that course of action.

I caught the last bit driving home. McCown and Brunt (or Blair? or neither?) we're saying something about how the Jays have two options regarding their cap; go to $60 mil, or up it to $120. $60 seemed a bit more plausible, but they we're saying how it really wouldn't go over well with the fanbase and definitely would not put asses in the seats. I wanted to hear what they thought about upping it to $120, but they broke and spoke golf after.

Can anyone fill me in on this? Not necessarily what the Fan guys think but rather what the chances are of actually swinging for the fences next year.

Thanks for the link btw, yL. Listening to it now.

Well frankly your guess is as good as mine or anyone else's in terms of payroll. Beeston says he can get the 120 if he asks for it, but he hasn't given any indication as to whether he will or not. I'm inclined to believe that this noise about it is just talk to appease the fans, but there seems to be at least some truth to the idea that Beeston could get the money if he really lobbied for it.

It'll be interesting to see what happens with Anthopolous. I've always thought that he comes across much better than JP ever did in the media, but of course how well he can actually run a team's baseball operations is another story entirely. Because of his young age (32 I think offhand) he's already drawing comparisons to Theo Epstein in Boston and Andrew Friedman in Tampa. Hopefully he can be as successful as those guys.

I wouldn't open up the wallet yet, until they have themselves organized and go with a clean slate. Once they have that structure build on it, don't build on it the way it is now - keep the money status quo for now.

i rather re-build, and try to attain top notch prospects (via draft of trade) before shelling out the cash.. i do'nt want to make the same mistakes again by going all-in with all these FA's, only to have it back-fire.. we don't have a strong enough foundation/core yet

evilRyu wrote:i rather re-build, and try to attain top notch prospects (via draft of trade) before shelling out the cash.. i do'nt want to make the same mistakes again by going all-in with all these FA's, only to have it back-fire.. we don't have a strong enough foundation/core yet

Same. The only problem with this approach is that you require ownership with serious testicular fortitude, because it means plowing money into players who might not see the inside of the Rogers Centre for years while watching crowds dwindle. And given the bed-wetting of this past June I'm not sure that Rogers is willing to go that route...but here's hoping that they simply weren't willing to do it with JP.

Schadenfreude wrote:

evilRyu wrote:i rather re-build, and try to attain top notch prospects (via draft of trade) before shelling out the cash.. i do'nt want to make the same mistakes again by going all-in with all these FA's, only to have it back-fire.. we don't have a strong enough foundation/core yet

Same. The only problem with this approach is that you require ownership with serious testicular fortitude, because it means plowing money into players who might not see the inside of the Rogers Centre for years while watching crowds dwindle. And given the bed-wetting of this past June I'm not sure that Rogers is willing to go that route...but here's hoping that they simply weren't willing to do it with JP.

If the Jays trade Halladay, then ownership won't have a choice. When Ricciardi came here, the Jays had Delgado, Halladay, Carpenter, Escobar, Koch, Stewart, Cruz, etc. It was a mix of young players with upside and veterans who were tradeable. They did not need to start from the bottom because the pieces were there for quick turnaround if done properly. They just needed to slash payroll for a few years and dump some overpriced contracts, and at the same time try to replenish the talent lost.

Now? We have Halladay with one year left on his deal and none of the veteran players outside of maybe a couple of relievers (Downs/Frasor) have any type of trade value. Remove Halladay from the equation and this is one of the worst teams in baseball (Washington Nationals bad). This will not be a quick turnaround. It's going to take hitting rock bottom (trading Roy and sucking for a few years) before it has a chance to look any better. Whether ownership wants to pay for the unknown or not, someone will have to convince them that they have no other alternative. We are not going to replace one of the best pitchers of this generation, and the only way to acquire one with anywhere near that upside is via the draft (unfortunately the chances of getting another 240-250 inning workworse with a career 130 ERA+ who is willing to take below market value deals at every turn is very, very unlikely).

Personally, if the option is there to increase payroll, then do it. The roster is flawed, but with some prudent additions and some internal development the chance for being competitive is there. Keep Halladay here and try to win with him. With that said, a team looking to add payroll does not act the way Rogers ownership acted the past year. The payroll will decrease before it increases.

My worry is that spending big money on draft bonuses and hiring the best development people doesn't do anything for your yearly balance sheet, and with Ted out it seems that's the direction Rogers is taking. Hopefully someone on the personnel side can help them wrap their heads around the concept of cost/benefit analysis and how ridiculously skewed the system is in favour of cheap youngsters. I have my doubts whether that will convince them to fork out $3-4m a year in above slot bonuses, or to chase down the best minor league coaches, though.