What do we do with Beastista?

[Randle McMurphy]

There's a huge difference between a three year contract and a back-ended loaded six year deal. Sorry, I don't see the two situations as analogous. You could say that there is a higher risk associated with giving a young pitcher like Romero a multi-year deal than giving Bautista three years. Bautista has proven his durability, Romero, could get hurt like a lot of other young pitchers and become an albatross. I saw no problem doing the Romero deal and would see a three year deal for Bautista as relatively low risk because this team is unlikely to be chasing other team's big ticket free agents for a few years.

And frankly, I'd rather deal with Jose than go after another team's free agent power hitter. It's a different kind of commitment.

I agree with some of what you've said, but again, the reasoning you used in your previous post (signing him because he's a marketable fan favorite, signing him to "indulge" the fans after a star player's departure a year before) was the same reasoning that was used to justify signing Vernon Wells to an enormous contract.

My point is that the team should be careful and not give him everything he asks for (because yes, signing Bautista to a multi-year deal carries major risk, as nobody knows how long he can keep this up for), and I suspect that they will.

[J-Roc]

I like that AA sounds like he'll play it safe with Bautista. No placating to excited fans.

[dagger]

Except that going forward, there will be a correlation between Rogers' willingness to spend and the quality of fan support. I don't consider any kind of three year deal mere "placating the fans". He's not only a 50 HR guy, he has 115 ribbies and more importantly to me, he'll have 100+ walks, which is the sign of a judicious hitter, not a free swinger who the league will "figure out" next year. I consider him a solid investment. A good fielder at multiple positions, with reasonably good speed, a good eye at the plate, and a winner's attitude. No need to give him a six year deal, or backloaded deal.

Heck, we're not contending next year by intent, so front load it so the downstream impact is minimized. We have Roy and Ryan off the books next year, Overpay as well.

[Randle McMurphy]

“Thing is, I don’t know how anybody can go off just one season and say ‘Oh, that’s what this player is,” Anthopoulos said. “As an industry, we’re not that good.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/b ... le1712941/

[dagger]

I read the article. In fact I posted it. And the article suggests that's the way he is leaning. But the fact also is you want to try to get an extension if it's not too expensive, rather than wait until it is. The money for a front loaded deal certainly is there.

And that little missive about his home vs road home run production? Well, he's going to get at least 20 homers on the road, and not too many major leaguers can say that, and he's going to play half his games next season at the Rogers Centre. So I don't buy into that argument either.

[evilRyu]

dagger, those are some really good points.. Never thought of front-loading the contract, considering we're not in true contention yet, and we'll have BJ's contract off the books.

[dagger]

dagger, those are some really good points.. Never thought of front-loading the contract, considering we're not in true contention yet, and we'll have BJ's contract off the books.

Let's put it this way. We save $16 million with Ryan and the Halliday payoff off the books. Scott Downs may be gone. Overbay, too. Most people seem to believe it's not the time to chase big time free agents. And if that's the case, how are we going to spend the money we have. Let the pigs at Rogers pocket it? Even with that deadweight salary on the books, it hardly impacted our ability to sign our draft picks and Latin free agents. So I say, why not a front loaded three year deal? I'd assume his production to average 30 homers per over the next three seasons. At worst, he'll be a little overpaid on the front end, and decent value after that. Right now, he's not getting in anyone's way either. He can play third and make EE disappear. He can play first and make Overbay disappear. It's not like we have a ready prospect for third base that he's blocking, and Snider is showing aptitude for left field.

[Randle McMurphy]

Halladay.

[SharoneWright]

Frontload him, and let him player-manage. KIll 2 birds with 1 stone.

[Michael Bradley]

One year deal.

If he is for real, then the Jays can either 1) trade him next deadline, 2) let him go as a free agent for 2 picks, or 3) try to re-sign him.

If he's for real, we're going to look really, really stupid trading him for draft picks or prospects. You can't keep dealing players the fans identify with for prospects because you're afraid to play them. Jose is just now really starting to make the covers of sports sections here in town. People are cluing into the person. Rogers has taken a shiat kicking for Sportsnet 1. Let them indulge the fans a little. I would be content to keep Jose for three years, even if "for real" means 30 homers instead of 45-50. We're not contending next year or the year after. Too many of our best prospects are at Double A or lower, much lower in some cases. And even when they arrive at the ML level, most will need a couple of years to grow into their potential. If we can carry a year of Ryan's salary and money for trading Roy, we can certainly carry a bit of salary for a player actually helping raise awareness of the Jays and create new fans.

The Jays still have to assess value to each player regardless of how far away the team is from contending.

From 2006-onwards (when Bautista started playing somewhat regularly) he hit .242/.334/.412 with 59 home runs in 1911 plate appearances. This year at age 29 he is hitting .264/.384/.622 with 49 home runs and counting. That has to raise red flags as far as how much of that performance can be sustained. We're talking nearly a .300 increase in OPS from his career. Sure if he dips to .850 or so he'll still be good, but again, prior to this season he was hovering around .750 for his career. Now he is heading into his 30's and the league will know who the heck he is next season and beyond.

The last player who had 45+ home runs, 100 walks, and 1.000+ OPS out of no where (off the top of my head) was Carlos Pena, and despite not being able to repeat that season Pena has been pretty good since then (.871 OPS in 2008, .893 in 2009, and struggling this year at .752). So a short three year contact with regression being expected may not be too bad, but it is the type of contract mixed with Vernon's deal that has a huge chance of haunting the team, even if it is short-term.

If the Jays are going to pay him for his 2010 performance, then do it for one year. Baseball has had too many flash in the pans to get caught up in one great season.

[dagger]

I'm sorry. You're not selling me.

Your reasons seem to be that because Vernon Wells contract sucks, we can't commit to Bautista without some kind of guaranteed production, but Wells biggest payout years actually began this year because he got both $8.5 million of his signing bonus (final installment) and $12.5 million of salary. That's $21 million in salary - what he will make in straight salary next year.

We know we have a lot more latitude with the budget next year and the year after - no Halliday subsidy, no BJ Ryan, probably no Scott Downs and Overbay. Halliday and Ryan don't even have to be replaced. There are ready replacements for Overbay on the roster right now, even Bautista.

There is no salary cap, and no case yet to be made for signing major free agents, except the bullpen might use a smart pickup.

I'm not proposing he be paid as if he will hit 50 homers going forward. I'm saying base an extension offer on the presumption of 30 homers/100 RBIs, a good third batter now, good fifth or sixth hitter when the wave of young talent really hits us in 2-4 years. We paid Vernon $21 million this year in salary and signing bonuses, so if we can afford that, and could afford Ryan, Halliday, Downs and Overbay and still do all we did with the draft and Latin players, we can afford Bautista in a deal that estimates his production like I do. If Bautista wants to be paid like a 50 HR guy going forward, that's different. But I'd try to get a home town discount, giving him security in the city where he wants to play, before being forced to pay him like an MVP.

[rtcaino]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/b ... le1712941/

Anthopoulos’s eye tells him the mechanical reasons behind Bautista’s surge makes sense. But he wonders about those home and road splits, which through Thursday had Bautista hitting 30 of his homers at the Rogers Centre compared to 17 on the road, and has a home batting average of .293, or 56 points about his road average.

“Maybe those numbers on the road are really him,” Anthopoulos said.

Here is his quadruple slash line on the road.

.241 .352 .510 .863

Here is the average production from a RF in the majors, as per baseball prospectus (http://www.baseballprospectus.com/stati ... tml#postot)

.269 .345 .444 .789

For comparisons sake, here is the average 3b:

.265 .329 .419 .748


I'm kind of surprised by the difference in quality between 3b and RF. I wonder if the disparity in JB's defense at the two positions is enough to account for this difference in expected production.

[OldNo7]

Pretty sure the Red Sox would love to have him in RF, seeing the way he's mashing at Fenway this series.

[Michael Bradley]

I'm sorry. You're not selling me.

Your reasons seem to be that because Vernon Wells contract sucks, we can't commit to Bautista without some kind of guaranteed production....

It doesn't have to do with Wells. It has to do with whether Bautista's hitting, even factoring likely decline, will be worth it as he enters his 30's.

.755, .753, .718, .757, 1.006

One of those things doesn't quite resemble the others. Those are his OPS numbers from 2006-onwards.

Prior to this season Bautista was a platoon player. He had a lot of trouble with RHP but could mash lefties. Now he is mashing everything. You don't want to get too high on someone when everything is going right, and too low on someone when things are down, especially when the high is this big of an outlier. There is a reason why AA was able to get Escobar and Morrow for very little, that's because he didn't care about how "bad" they were doing at the time and knew an upswing was very likely. On the flip side, AA has to realistically determine whether Bautista is worth $10 million (or whatever) per year on a long-term contract while he is coming off an MVP calibre season where there is no where to go but down.

I understand what you are saying. I like Bautista, and signing him for three years while the team doesn't have a capable RF or 3B in the system is fine in theory. The issue is whether he will be worth it in the long run. This type of improvement all across the board is unheard of. With a one year contract the risk is minimized and a long-term deal can still be worked on during that time assuming Bautista reaches a new level of performance that makes his old performance look irrelevant (.850 OPS?).

[dagger]

Let's add one more perspective to the debate

http://joeposnanski.si.com/2010/09/22/j ... itter_feed

Is Bautista’s season a fluke? People may point out that the Rogers Centre has been a nice home run ballpark in 2010, for whatever reason (or maybe no reason at all), and Bautista has hit 30 of his 49 homers at home. People may point out that Bautista snuck up on the league and everyone will go to school on him during the off-season and he will have to make all sorts of adjustments next year.* People may point out that Jose Bautista — like Greg Vaughn, like Brady Anderson, like Luis Gonzalez — has no business hitting 50 home runs, the number that Hank Aaron never even reached.

*According to the indescribably wonderful Fangraphs Web site, Bautista has been:


• Third most productive in the league against fastballs (behind only Paul Konerko and Josh Hamilton)
• Second in the league against sliders (behind Robinson Cano)
• Second in the league against curveballs (behind Vlad Guerrero)

That’s a pretty tough combination. Bautista has struggled against changeups, split-fingered fastballs, knucklers — stuff that throws off the timing. After this season, you can bet he’ll get a healthy dose of those kinds of pitches. Trouble is, there aren’t many pitchers in the AL who throw great changeups, splitters or knucklers.

Well, we’ll see. That scout I mentioned above, we were talking about Bautista, and I asked him if he thought the guy could ever repeat this season. He said, “Well, I’m not saying he’s going to hit 50 home runs in a season again. But he will hit 30 or 40 against next year.”

I said, “So you think he’s for real?”

And he said: “Those aren’t imaginary home runs he’s hitting.”

[Randle McMurphy]

Nobody here has tried to claim that Bautista's season is a fluke or that he'll regress significantly next season.

What we're saying is that baseball (as it is in any other sport) is full of one-year wonders. The Jays are in a position where they don't have to commit themselves to anything long-term with Bautista and can find out just how "real" his production is next season. Why waste that opportunity?