Shaun Marcum Traded to the Brewers for Brett Lawrie

[Randle McMurphy]

All of his comments and remarks to the media and fans over the last two years have had a tendency not to come true. That would be my reason.

Roy Halliday was traded in part because he was expressly told Rogers was going to cut payroll and so he asked to be dealt to a contender (a contender in this sport usually means an organization will to spend north of $100 million which the Jays have never done, IIRC.)

Payroll was down against last year, and by my calculations, there's a 50-50 chance it's down again this year despite the balloon payments to Vernon.

Right now we have holes in the bullpen, a hole in either LF or 3B depending on where Bautista ends up - unless we're trading him for a prospect on the sell-high theory, in which case we would have both holes to fill. We have great uncertainty behind the plate and a possible downgrade at first since Lind's fielding is nowhere as good as Overbay's and aside from more power, he doesn't bring much more average that OverPay.

So while not assuming the payroll is being chopped again, I do see the possibility it will be smaller, and frankly, with the way the BoSox have improved, and even the Orioles made a nice acquisition in Reynolds, I have to wonder if this team really intends to duplicate its 85 win season, or whether we should prepare for the 70 win season everybody was expecting last year,

Call me cynical, but I need to see some of these question marks turned into answers before I buy any tickets.

And if this is to be a 70 win season, essentially by design, well, Rogers can go screw itself.

I think they are perfectly fine with winning 80 or so games again with major league talent like Bautista, Lind, and Hill still on the team, and that irks me more than any 70 win rebuilding year ever could. They appear unwilling to go all in on rebuilding, and even more unwilling to spend the necessary cash to make this team a contender. That only results in mediocrity.

[Randle McMurphy]

This deal should've been made after getting Zack. What if we don't get him? Should I expect a **** starting rotation for the next 2 years?

Don't worry about the rotation. It likely will still be one of the better rotations in the league, like it was last year, even without Marcum.

[LBJSeizedMyID]

Unwilling to go all in on rebuilding. What are you getting at dude? I don't get your logic.

[Randle McMurphy]

Some fired up fans in this thread. I guess what Rogers is trying to convince us is they won't go blow dough in free agency, but they'll do it to keep our own talent. So the plan is to build up as much of our own talent as possible, from the ground up.

Wasn't Marcum "our own talent?"

[rdtx2005]

The only reason this trade would make sense is if you think Marcum has peaked.

[flatjacket1]

I think he peaked.

One way or another, hes gone in 2 years anyways. (He said hes leaving to move closer to home)

If you believe the Jays should have gone all in for a 2-3 year run, keeping him MIGHT have panned out better.

If you are looking for a even better run in 4 or 5 years, this trade is gold.

[WpgPage]

he has peaked for sure no question

[Schad]

I think they are perfectly fine with winning 80 or so games again with major league talent like Bautista, Lind, and Hill still on the team, and that irks me more than any 70 win rebuilding year ever could. They appear unwilling to go all in on rebuilding, and even more unwilling to spend the necessary cash to make this team a contender. That only results in mediocrity.

It really depends on how much cash is necessary to be a contender, and that depends primarily on whether we have a large number of good cost-controlled players at the major league level; $100m goes a long way if you build through the draft, less so if you build like the Mets. Look, I'd love for Rogers to spend $120m-$140m each year to try to punch with the Yankees and Red Sox, but the truth remains that it's an awful lot to expect from any ownership group; rich though Rogers might be, losing money hand over foot for a couple years is still a big ask...the only owner in baseball who has taken that plunge is Mike Ilitch, and with the Tigers leveraged to the hilt that might change.

With AA, the franchise has finally (for the first time since Gillick was harvesting Latin America) demonstrated an understanding of baseball economics, and the necessity of starting with a good, young, cost-controlled base after years of overspending on mediocre veterans and cheaping out in the draft and international free agency. Believe me, though...if and when that investment bears fruit, I'll scream bloody murder if they refuse to spend enough to get the team over the top.

[dagger]

the only owner in baseball who has taken that plunge is Mike Ilitch, and with the Tigers leveraged to the hilt that might change.

For the record, there is a rumour at the meetings that the Nats are following up on Werth with a big pitch to Cliff Lee.

So it seems another team is ready to take that plunge.

[LBJSeizedMyID]

the only owner in baseball who has taken that plunge is Mike Ilitch, and with the Tigers leveraged to the hilt that might change.

For the record, there is a rumour at the meetings that the Nats are following up on Werth with a big pitch to Cliff Lee.

So it seems another team is ready to take that plunge.

Don't believe everything you hear

[dagger]

the only owner in baseball who has taken that plunge is Mike Ilitch, and with the Tigers leveraged to the hilt that might change.

For the record, there is a rumour at the meetings that the Nats are following up on Werth with a big pitch to Cliff Lee.

So it seems another team is ready to take that plunge.

Don't believe everything you hear

No, but a sea change has happened in Washington. This is where I diverge from some of you. Washington has Strasbourg (hopefully undiminished), Harper in the low minors, and a bunch of other exciting prospects. They aren't waiting for them to arrive BEFORE spending on big league talent. They are spending on talent now so that when they do arrive, they will be well-complemented, whereas Rogers is promising to spend after the young talent is in place, which means it can 2-4 years beyond 2013 before we might contend in the AL East. After all, our rivals are not standing still. If anything, the gap between us and Boston is widening, possibly NYK as well. And the TPA situation suggests that if an owner isn't really ready to go all in financially in the AL East, its vaunted formula of laying in a cheap base on good controllable talent might give you one or two good years, but isn't sustainable over the long run as controllables become unrestricted. This article made me jealous of the fans in Washington.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 0120607684

[mini]

Apparently Lee has been offered 7 years, but not by the Nats.

SI_JonHeyman: hearing there is a 7-year market for cliff lee (for 20-mil plus a yr). Not the nats tho. [via Twitter]

[LBJSeizedMyID]

I hear what you're saying but what makes you think once Rogers increases payroll to $120 M both Boston and NYY stay status quo? Only thing that will happen is they increase there's again. It's a never ending cat and mouse game. Get the core in place, sign them like they did with Romero, then start putting the pieces in place.

[WpgPage]

enjoy north of 20 when he is 40

[evilRyu]

I think he peaked.

One way or another, hes gone in 2 years anyways. (He said hes leaving to move closer to home)

If you believe the Jays should have gone all in for a 2-3 year run, keeping him MIGHT have panned out better.

If you are looking for a even better run in 4 or 5 years, this trade is gold.

I can't recall reading that. any link to support this claim?

[LBJSeizedMyID]

That was reported, but not confirmed. It sounded like AA approached Marcum about a possible extension and then that was it. Two days later he was traded. Take it for what it's worth, whether AA just got the vibe that Marucm wasn't interested or what.

[mini]

]

No, but a sea change has happened in Washington. This is where I diverge from some of you. Washington has Strasbourg (hopefully undiminished), Harper in the low minors, and a bunch of other exciting prospects. They aren't waiting for them to arrive BEFORE spending on big league talent. They are spending on talent now so that when they do arrive, they will be well-complemented, whereas Rogers is promising to spend after the young talent is in place, which means it can 2-4 years beyond 2013 before we might contend in the AL East. After all, our rivals are not standing still. If anything, the gap between us and Boston is widening, possibly NYK as well. And the TPA situation suggests that if an owner isn't really ready to go all in financially in the AL East, its vaunted formula of laying in a cheap base on good controllable talent might give you one or two good years, but isn't sustainable over the long run as controllables become unrestricted. This article made me jealous of the fans in Washington.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 0120607684

Doesn't it make more sense to spend after your young talent arrives? That way you know what you actually have instead of speculating and then ending up with Werth for 7 years at huge cash. The 'plan' was to contend in 2012, last year we were set to be terrible but surprised. Should that change our plans? Look at the Raps this year... should we add salary (Iggy) just because there is a chance? I say no, stick to the plan. We were all happy for a proper rebuild exactly one year ago so why divert from the plan now... because we over-achieved? I don't see this team as being ready yet.

To add, I don't think we should dump all of our big-league talent just because we dealt Marcum. Maybe our braintrust thought it was a deal they couldn't pass-up. So be it.

The only way I deviate from the '2012 plan' is if we can for sure land a DH, 1stB, 3rdB, C, more Bullpen, an Ace SP. I don't see that happening. If we can get a Manny, Fielder, Martin/Olivo, Grienke then we have a chance, otherwise I don't see us finishing above NY or Bos.

[Schad]

the only owner in baseball who has taken that plunge is Mike Ilitch, and with the Tigers leveraged to the hilt that might change.

For the record, there is a rumour at the meetings that the Nats are following up on Werth with a big pitch to Cliff Lee.

So it seems another team is ready to take that plunge.

The Nats have been ones of the most profitable teams in baseball over the last few years (Forbes estimated profits of over $40m in their 2008 review and over $30m in 2009), so even going on a spending spree leaves them well in the black regardless of results. By contrast, we've been in the bottom third of the league...broke even in 2008, made about $13m in 2009. If we throw a tonne of money at the wrong players at the wrong time, Rogers loses hand over foot...and while it would be nice if they were willing to do so, again, 29 out of 30 teams don't spend more money on a consistent basis than they make.

As for the Nats, as nice as it might be to see them spending money, they're spending money stupidly; I don't care what message is being sent to the fans, throwing $126m at Jason Werth is silly.

[WpgPage]

your jealous of Washington fans? let all see how nationals fans feel about that contract when they cant afford to get guys later down the road and Werth is providing similar offense to Wells

[dagger]

your jealous of Washington fans? let all see how nationals fans feel about that contract when they cant afford to get guys later down the road and Werth is providing similar offense to Wells

Considering the owner is worth $2.5 billion and wants a winner, I don't think the fans are going to have the same buyers' remorse as Rogers has with Wells.